Eastern Wisconsin or suburban Philadelphia, in particular. Suburban Pittsburgh, if you prefer mid-sized cities (I do). Eau Claire would be my WI pick: nice small city, with a college, smack in the middle of Trump's reddest zone. (I was in a full sized jet once that landed at Eau Claire's tiny airport. Exciting!) Eau Claire is also very close to Minneapolis, which has more to do than I can describe, and Madison, a few hours to the south, has a historically liberal community.

As a matter of fact, it would help immensely if a Democrats, clustered as they are in and near cities, would just move out to the outer suburbs of whatever cities they live in. Ah hell, who wants to live in drug-infested rural areas anyway?

So, we are in complete agreement.. You are willfully ignorant..

Can't you just admit you got "Trumped!" again? I once again purposely used Donald Trump's words verbatim, and you called me "ignorant"... shocker!

Just like you were when you claimed Hillary Clinton was going to be our next President..

Did Trump win the 2016 election 3 months ago? Well, why didn't you let us know? {sarcasm off}

So I thought HRC would win the popular vote by around 2-3% and become POTUS -- one out of two. Not my first wrong prediction since I also predicted a Gore win based on polls. To this day, I have friends who give me ribbing about Bush beating Gore in a "landslide"... so not my first rodeo by a long shot. Democrats have won the popular vote in 6 out of the last 7 elections so I have this new theory that a million of the diehard Democrats should just volunteer to relocate to the rust belt states... among many other theories. :D

Glad we could find some common ground..

You twisting a comment around to fit your narrative is extremely "common ground." Donald Trump's words being described as willfully ignorant is also fairly common. :)

If you DO decide to actually address the REAL argument,[about climate change] you can start with the NOAA whistleblower who proves how the NOAA fudges and LIES about readings and data to "prove" that global warming is real.

Make that alleged whistleblowers (unnamed to date), and yes, as this letter from the ranking member of the Science, Space and Technology committee explains, that's all bullshit.

Now, I can understand when a Congressman like Lamar Smith of Texas, soaking in oil money, makes nonsensical accusations about Climate Change - he's being paid well to basically accuse thousands of reputable scientists of falsifying data.

But why do folks who know nothing about the subject follow this lead? Politics. Nothing else can explain it: they certainly aren't qualified to assess the data, as the scientists at NOAA are.

Then when those scientists (who haven't got the giant money-pot the oil companies provide to climate deniers) attempt to disseminate the truth, they are accused of "marketing".

This is just one of several unjustified attacks on science promulgated by the GOP in recent years, spurred by special interests, and eagerly consumed by folks like yourself, who couldn't tell a Climate Scientist from a cable installer, but know that the crap spewed by the right MUST be correct, just because Democrats believe the opposite.

Just remember, the scientists are the ones with the master's degrees, years of scientific data, and a vigorous system of peer review. Their opposition has buckets of money from the oil industry, industry-paid 'scientists' whose work is buried if it disagrees with their master's pre-ordained conclusions, and mysterious 'whistleblowers' quoted about things they obviously know nothing about: one 'whistleblower' allegedly described the scientists changing data for an article at a meeting months after the article had been already submitted for publication.

With all that hot air being thrown about, no wonder the planet's warming.

So, we are in complete agreement.. You are willfully ignorant..

Just like you were when you claimed Hillary Clinton was going to be our next President..

Glad we could find some common ground..

Well, just so you understand, I don’t know anything about David Duke. OK? I don’t know anything about what you’re even talking about with white supremacy or white supremacists. So, I don’t know.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OM5kT_p4-K8

Of course you don't know.. It's called willful ignorance..

Yes, I agree "it's called willful ignorance," and Michale has again been "Trumped!" This concludes your learning opportunity for today. :D

If you DO decide to actually address the REAL argument, you can start with the NOAA whistleblower who proves how the NOAA fudges and LIES about readings and data to "prove" that global warming is real...

You can then address the fact that the global warming fanatics have to "market" their so-called "science"...

Clue: REAL science doesn't have to be marketed or focus-group'ed. REAL science stands on it's own merits..

Of course you have moved on...

Because it's downright embarrassing for you to preach tolerance and love and then have THIS group of Left Wingers show the world what the Left REALLY thinks of tolerance and love..

Put another way, if this "unaffiliated" group was protesting Odumbo during the Odumbo administration, ya'all would be painting the ENTIRETY of the Right Wingery with this group's violence..

Don't bother denying it because you know and I know it's factual..

So, explain how this is not hypocritical??

You can't because it is...

Of course you don't know.. It's called willful ignorance..

But the Democrat Party is the Party that created the KKK...

This is fact..

And, since anything in the past is applied to today (President Trump's Muslim Ban) then that means that, in the here and now, The Democrat Party is The KKK Party...

Tree-huggers - c'mon, even Exxon says Global Climate Change is a real thing. They just don't want us to blame oil. They want to blame trees.

Once again, you create a straw-man argument because you can't address the FACTS...

NO ONE on this planet denies that the climate is changing..

The climate on this planet has been changing for a billion years, long before humans were on the scene..

The climate will CONTINUE to change long after humans have gone the way of the dodo...

So, please.. Either address the REAL argument or just shut up about it..

There is your "peaceful" and "tolerant" Left Wingery...

Now they create THESE scumbags... :^/

Well, just so you understand, I don’t know anything about David Duke. OK? I don’t know anything about what you’re even talking about with white supremacy or white supremacists. So, I don’t know.

Balthasar [220]

I forget whether it was Neil or Kick who pointed out that BAMN is neither a creation of, nor an actor working on behalf of, Democrats, or Berkeley students generally. The right may love this week-old stunt, but I've moved on.

I don't know what group you're talking about. You wouldn't want me to condemn a group that I know nothing about. :)

And I say you are full of shit.. ALL of you always blame Republicans and the Right for the actions of individuals...

I would prove it to you, but I know you always run away or back out or refuse to concede the facts, so I won't waste my time...

If my having a life off the Internet or not habitating 100% of the time in your neck of the web nor hanging on every word of your cut-and-paste drivel constitutes "running away," then truly I'm running a marathon.

No one could prove that "ALL" of us "always blame Republicans and the Right for the actions of individuals," but there is overwhelming evidence that you will indeed waste your time. :)

You didn't mind Bubba's deferments and draft dodging.. THAT is only a bad thing with someone with a '-R' after his name...

You know precious little about what I mind, but I will say you're wrong about that. As you've stated on many occasions, your orange idol is not really a Republican so who gives a rat's tail what letter is actually after his anglicized Drumpf these days? I certainly couldn't care less since he was no less a jerk when he had a "-D" or an "-I" after his name... still just a con artiste extraordinaire looking for an angle and a way to exploit others in search of money/fame/power. A Drumpf by any other name... John Miller, John Barron... is still just a Drumpf. :)

Once again, your hypocrisy shines thru...

Once again, you speak of that which you know nothing.

Really?? Yer going to go with the "I know you are but what am I" rebuttal??

No, I'm going with the "you spot it, you got it" rebuttal, which in technical terms is referred to as "projection."

What are you?? 9?? 10???

So... finally you accidentally stumble into a bit of truth... I am definitely a 10 -- sung to the tune of Bolero by Maurice Ravel. :D

And you still say that after backing Trump. Wow.

Ya'all don't like it when the GOP steam rolls over Democrats?? Quit changing the rules that all it to happen.

Yeah, see, Republicats claim to be 'originalists' and to faithfully abide by the Federalist documents, but that's all so much smoke and crap to cover raw power grabs by kleptocrats and corporate transnationals. So, if we do it, feel free to show your true colors by upping the ante..

I forget whether it was Neil or Kick who pointed out that BAMN is neither a creation of, nor an actor working on behalf of, Democrats, or Berkeley students generally. The right may love this week-old stunt, but I've moved on.

"It seems that the outcome of the last election is understood only by people like me. Frankly, I don't like Donald Trump either. He is arrogant, careless with what he says, overly competitive and insensitive.

I voted for Trump because he was the alternative to letting a collection of free spenders, organizers, race-baiters, intellectuals, tree huggers and professional value arbitrators continue to spend our grandchildren's money."

Really?

Free Spenders - back to that in a moment...

Organizers - you don't want anyone to be organized. 'Cause anarchy works out so much better for everyone.

Race-baiters - no one should point out obvious racism, such as Jeff Sessions today appointing the guy who argued in the Supreme Court in favor of racial segregation to be a Deputy Attorney General. That happened. We shouldn't talk about it.

Intellectuals - enjoy your fact-free existence.

Tree-huggers - c'mon, even Exxon says Global Climate Change is a real thing. They just don't want us to blame oil. They want to blame trees.

Professional values arbitrators - you mean, like Ted Cruz, any number of evangelist preachers, Betsy DeVos, or hell, Jeff Sessions, who can get sanctimonious about 'values' while he guts voter rights laws. Would you worship in a congregation led by Donald Trump? Then shut up, hypocrite.

Finally, back to 'free spenders'. It's incontrovertible fact: under Bush, the deficit went up; under Obama the deficit went down. Those were the last two experiments we've run. We could compare the same numbers for the previous two presidents, and the results are - the same!

The assertion that Democrats run up deficits is the biggest lie of them all. And there's proof.

Did Trump filling his cabinet up with Goldman Sach's board of directors not put up any red flags for you? You talk a good anti-spending, anti-corporate game, but you don't seem to mean any of it, except the 'cut government services for the poor' part. Again, the hypocrisy is mind boggling.

If this is an example of Trump-think among the faithful, then a significant part of this country are facing a serious Reality Crisis. Perhaps the problem is all the heroin out there in the boondocks, the pernicious news fakery on Fox, or just plain boneheaded stupidity. I don't know, but somehow I think our future depends on the answer.

There is your "peaceful" and "tolerant" Left Wingery...

Look at the monsters that the Democrat Party has created...

First the Democrats created the KKK...

Now they create THESE scumbags... :^/

I'll remind you of this milquetoast lame non-condemnation of Left Wingery violence then next time yer hysterical about Right Winger violence.. :D

Clinton acted from a well-established position that the Vietnam War was bad. Trump, on the other hand, was probably acting in defense of his hairdo.

Clinton acted out of cowardice and a desire to screw anything in a skirt...

Typical Democrat...

"You started it?" That's your defense? Now look who's in the schoolyard. Whatever Biden did once, McConnell has, as they say, turned it up to 11. For example just look at today's news.

Democrats made the rules.. And, like with Harry Reid, ya'all yell and scream and whine and cry when the Republicans use the rules the DEMOCRATS create to the Republicans own advantage..

Like Senator Sessions being confirmed as AG :D

Ya'all don't like it when the GOP steam rolls over Democrats??

Quit changing the rules that all it to happen.. :D

Don't forget the aphorism: Democrats like groups, but tend to dislike individuals, Republicans like individuals, but dislike people in groups.

It's not universal enough to be a truism, but true enough to be useful in situations like these where you are both making the same point, but seeing it from different perspectives.

Violence is bad. Next...

You didn't mind Bubba's deferments and draft dodging.. THAT is only a bad thing with someone with a '-R' after his name...

Because Republicans seem to think that the military is a miracle cure for everything from immigration to dandruff.

Clinton acted from a well-established position that the Vietnam War was bad. Trump, on the other hand, was probably acting in defense of his hairdo.

Kerry went to war, and was trashed and lied about later by the GOP for it. You could cut that hypocrisy with a cake-knife.

McConnell's Obdurance Rule, AKA The Biden Rule

"You started it?" That's your defense? Now look who's in the schoolyard. Whatever Biden did once, McConnell has, as they say, turned it up to 11. For example just look at today's news.

And I say you are full of shit.. ALL of you always blame Republicans and the Right for the actions of individuals...

I would prove it to you, but I know you always run away or back out or refuse to concede the facts, so I won't waste my time...

Walk a mile in Poor Donald's special bone spur shoes... the coward who got 5 deferments from service and described dodging STDs as his personal Vietnam?

You didn't mind Bubba's deferments and draft dodging.. THAT is only a bad thing with someone with a '-R' after his name...

Once again, your hypocrisy shines thru...

Now, now, snowflake... put down that mirror. :)

Really?? Yer going to go with the "I know you are but what am I" rebuttal??

What are you?? 9?? 10???

I'll be happy to when you walk a mile in President Trump's shoes... :D

Walk a mile in Poor Donald's special bone spur shoes... the coward who got 5 deferments from service and described dodging STDs as his personal Vietnam?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h822LPnM5uw

Ummmmmm.... No, thanks.

I will, however, endeavor to always speak about Trump with the same deference and respect that you've shown to HRC.

You don't seem to have any problem criticising, abusing or accusing others.. But ya don't like it when others do it to you...

Now, now, snowflake... put down that mirror. :)

Now THERE is a load of horse-shit.. :D

So I take it you're in the bathroom buried in your own feces. Make sure you write your weight on the wall so you'll know when you're finished and log the results so you'll know how much to pay CW. :)

As you have admitted, you HAVEN'T made any comments condemning Party based violence..

No, horses ass, I have admitted I don't consider the actions of some as the actions of an entire Party so therefore find no reason to constantly play the Party blame game. Groupthink is your raison d'etre... not mine.

Game.. Set... Match... :D

Now, now, snowflake... put down the match or you'll blow yourself to smithereens... hoisted by your own peturd. :)

Thanks.. I haven't heard that in a while and it gave me a warm and fuzzy... :D

I'll be happy to when you walk a mile in President Trump's shoes... :D

You don't seem to have any problem criticising, abusing or accusing others.. But ya don't like it when others do it to you...

Funny how that is, eh? :D

I'll be happy to when you walk a mile in President Trump's shoes... :D

You don't seem to have any problem criticising, abusing or accusing others.. But ya don't like it when others do it to you...

Funny how that is, eh? :D

Now THERE is a load of horse-shit.. :D

Indeed. Where is the evidence YOU are against violence, soldier?

All my comments to date that condemn Party based violence.. :D

As you have admitted, you HAVEN'T made any comments condemning Party based violence..

Game.. Set... Match... :D

Yer right.. I was conflating your return with Paula's because ya'all act so much alike...

At least I can admit it. :D

You should apologize to Paula then for your behavior. I don't really mind you calling me names or insulting me. If I worried about every goober proselytizing at me from their moral high horse, glass house, or doublewide... *LOL*

So, you are saying NOW that you have never condemned any violence from the Right Wingery???

Oh, you twisted my words again... shocker! You asked me to condemn violence from the Left Wingery as passionately as I have condemned violence from the Right Wingery. I am simply saying that your MO and mine are different. You lump individuals into categories and demean their group. I don't generally blame an entire Party, any Party, for the actions of some... in the same way I don't blame a religion, any religion, for the actions of some. So there's really no need for me to passionately condemn either Republicans or Democrats or Independents or Greens as much as I condemn the other because I don't roll that way.

So, since you NOW claim you have never condemned any violence from the Right Wingery and it's obvious you have never condemned any violence from the Left Wingery..

Where is the evidence that you are against violence???

Indeed. Where is the evidence YOU are against violence, soldier? Hanc Defendemus... This We'll Defend. Why would anyone who was employed as a trained fighting machine condemn the violence of others?

Walk a mile in my shoes
Just walk a mile in my shoes
Before you abuse, criticize and accuse
Walk a mile in my shoes

I believe I also said that the Dems would probably not go nuclear on Gorsuch and save their big guns for the next pick.

Which is exactly what I have been saying..

I may have been mistaken. It appears that some Dems are finally sprouting vertebrae. In particular, the argument that the Republicans shouldn't be rewarded for their very bad behavior vis-a-vis the Garland nomination has begun to win me over.

And, of course, the fact that you were in agreement with me had NOTHING to do with your change of heart, right? :D hehehehe

The logic is persuasive - if the Dems allow the GOP to get away with McConnell's Obdurance Rule,

AKA The Biden Rule

The simplest means would be by placing a Senatorial "hold" on the nomination, which would require a cloture vote (2/3) to undo.

That's a Senate Rule that can be easily changed by a simple majority...

McConnell could respond by invoking the nuclear option, blowing up our system of government in the meantime, or attempt a one-off rule change in order to push through this particular nomination.

Funny how you didn't consider it "blowing up our system of government" when Harry Reid did it..

Your partisan hypocrisy is showing. :D

The constitution grants the Senate both Consent and Advice.

Which ALSO means that the Constitution grants the Senate NOT to Consent and Advise...

I'd put Elizabeth Warren in charge of the negotiating squad for the Dems.

Yea.. Cuz she did SO well with the Ben Carson nomination, eh? :D heh

I believe I also said that the Dems would probably not go nuclear on Gorsuch and save their big guns for the next pick.

I may have been mistaken. It appears that some Dems are finally sprouting vertebrae. In particular, the argument that the Republicans shouldn't be rewarded for their very bad behavior vis-a-vis the Garland nomination has begun to win me over.

The logic is persuasive - if the Dems allow the GOP to get away with McConnell's Obdurance Rule, that will become the norm for the next century. That's unacceptable to those who believe in a strong America. Indeed, if the Dems don't make this point at this time with a moderate like Gorsuch, the point would be lost in the face of a Bork-like nomination, and the permanent dysfunction that it promises will make the Wiemar Republic look like a legislative dream state.

The simplest means would be by placing a Senatorial "hold" on the nomination, which would require a cloture vote (2/3) to undo.

McConnell could respond by invoking the nuclear option, blowing up our system of government in the meantime, or attempt a one-off rule change in order to push through this particular nomination. That too, would set precedent, but could limit the damage to "if I'm enough of a prick", which I guess wouldn't stop anyone from doing it in the future.

The constitution grants the Senate both Consent and Advice. Suppose the parties were to negotiate the matter? I'd put Elizabeth Warren in charge of the negotiating squad for the Dems.

Yer right.. I was conflating your return with Paula's because ya'all act so much alike...

So I was wrong. I apologize..

At least I can admit it. :D

I am still waiting for the link where I actually passionately condemned Right Wingery violence

So, you are saying NOW that you have never condemned any violence from the Right Wingery???

So, since you NOW claim you have never condemned any violence from the Right Wingery and it's obvious you have never condemned any violence from the Left Wingery..

Where is the evidence that you are against violence???

By your own admission, there is none... Ergo, you are apparently, full of shit :D

I have a busy day so... later. :D

Run away.... Run away..... :D

It's funny you should ask.. Because I have looked and I cannot find your initial comment where you returned to Weigantia after your breakdown and subsequent recovery.. I

Ya know, the comment where you said you want to buy a tank...

It's a subterfuge... *looks right*... *looks left*... okay... you see... I edited that "breakdown" comment off this very same page. Keep that on the QT and the hush-hush, m'kay soldier? *LOL*

It seems to have disappeared.... Very strange..

Shhhhh... *looks left*... *looks right*... lay low partner... it's a conspiracy of epic proportions... on par with Jade Helm.

Okay... See Comment [37] above where you comment:

Glad ta see ya back, Kick.. :D

and then I comment:

To be honest, I haven't really been away... just been reading and not responding. My SO bet me that I couldn't NOT respond, and he lost that bet and now owes me the vehicle of my choice. I want an M1A2. It will come in handy when PT starts World War Tweet.

I edited out that "breakdown" paragraph and replaced it with me winning a bet with my SO that I wouldn't comment on here because he thought I couldn't NOT do it. It was some time in November when he bet me that I couldn't read and not respond from that moment right then until February 2017. I gave him an extra few days just to rub his nose in it. So he lost the bet, and I get the vehicle of my choice. I think altohone is correct about the price of gas so I'm probably going to go with a vehicle in either the Hummer or Jeep family of vehicles... still deciding.

Oh, wait! There's no edit function here. *PAC Man dies sound*

Well, there goes my fake edit conspiracy theory... gone in a puff of smoke. Of course, the fact that there is no edit function also blows to hell your made up BS about my "breakdown and subsequent recovery." You really should stop projecting your fantasy onto my reality.

If the issue is tiresome, put it to rest.. PROVE that you have condemned Left Wingery violence as passionately as you condemn Right Wingery violence in the manner you condemn Right Wingery violence..

I am still waiting for the link where I actually passionately condemned Right Wingery violence and also still waiting for the meat popsicle link. I have already proven you are full of BS by proving you made up fake news about me... you couldn't find my comment [37] on this very same page, snowflake, which you assumed had very strangely disappeared. *LOL*

As I have said before, I suspect you know you are full of BS and are paying CW by the pound of it.

I have a busy day so... later. :D

No, that won't get me to stop..

That will just signal your capitulation and surrender which would be a de-facto acknowledgement that I *AM* dead on balls accurate..

Not that I really need any because your inability to prove me wrong is acknowledgement enough.. :D

Link, please. I will be interested to read where I said I had to "recover" from any election since it weren't nearly my first rodeo AND since over the years I've voted for candidates from different parties, including R's, D's, I's, and Greens. *LOL*

It's funny you should ask.. Because I have looked and I cannot find your initial comment where you returned to Weigantia after your breakdown and subsequent recovery.. I

Ya know, the comment where you said you want to buy a tank...

It seems to have disappeared.... Very strange..

Oh, this is a fun game. So I think you are a meat popsicle. If I am wrong, simply provide to me a comment from you where you stated, without any prompting from me whatsoever, that you aren't a meat popsicle... or better yet, provide me that link where I "condemned violence from the Right Wingery."

If we were talking about me being a meat popsicle, then you would have logical argument..

But, since we're talking about your claim that you condemn ALL violence regardless of Party involved, you DON'T have a logical argument; you have nothing but lame evasions....

You really do have a reading comprehension problem, don't you? I said your cut-and-paste rhetoric was tiresome, and then you conflated that with me saying the issue was tiresome.

If the issue is tiresome, put it to rest.. PROVE that you have condemned Left Wingery violence as passionately as you condemn Right Wingery violence in the manner you condemn Right Wingery violence..

If you are tired of the issue, then put it to rest.. DUH....

It's very easy to get me to stop..

Monkey, monkey... Tamper Monkey -- (sung to the tune of "Shock the Monkey")

I was just going by what you said when you said how you had to recover from President Trump's election...

Link, please. I will be interested to read where I said I had to "recover" from any election since it weren't nearly my first rodeo AND since over the years I've voted for candidates from different parties, including R's, D's, I's, and Greens. *LOL*

So, you need a shrink to explain why YOU think that the size of President Trump's hands matter to you??

So you have a reading comprehension problem? Let me 'splain it to you in terms you'll understand:

"It's called disclosure, you......" My Cousin Vinny

I disclosed I'm not a psychiatrist and why my answer to your question would be in layman's terms. I suspect a psychiatrist would diagnose Trump with a case of Narcissistic Personality Disorder and expound on that theory from there.

I mean, seriously.... If I were wrong, it would be very VERY easy to prove me wrong..

Simply provide to me a comment from you where you condemned violence from the Left Wingery in the same manner and intensity that you have condemned violence from the Right Wingery and without any prompting from me whatsoever...

Oh, this is a fun game. So I think you are a meat popsicle. If I am wrong, simply provide to me a comment from you where you stated, without any prompting from me whatsoever, that you aren't a meat popsicle... or better yet, provide me that link where I "condemned violence from the Right Wingery."

The fact that ya'all simply respond with complaints on how tedious and boring the issue is PROVES that ya'all CAN'T prove me wrong..

You really do have a reading comprehension problem, don't you? I said your cut-and-paste rhetoric was tiresome, and then you conflated that with me saying the issue was tiresome.

As I said, it's very easy to get me to stop with this tediousness and boringness....

And as Peter Gabriel said: Monkey... Monkey... Monkey........ Shock the Monkey!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CnVf1ZoCJSo

Old news... President Trump obviously evolved on that issue.

Oh, that's right. You can't let people with '-R's after their name evolve... That's only reserved for those who toe your ideological line..

Still can't address the FACT that you approve of violence and hatred and bigotry and intolerance when it comes from the Left, eh? :D

Oh, no. Michael has "met the enemy," and the "enemy" by his own definition is... in fact... a Trump voter! I guess it's not easy being the easy mark of a con artist extraordinaire. :D

And yet, this "con artist" defeated... DECIMATED the biggest, meanest and most well-funded political juggernaut in the history of the planet...

Like I said.. You have your reality... The rest of America has FACTS... :D

No.. My definition of patriotic Americans is someone that DOESN'T vote for the candidate who wants open borders and wants a world order run by globalist corporations where America is simply one of the cogs in a huge wheel, no better than any other cog...

So naturally you voted for the globalist with businesses in multiple and numerous foreign countries who wrote about the future of Europe as well as the United States depending on a cohesive global economy. This nugget was for the World Economic Forum (WEF) of global elites who annually meet in Davos:

"What has been made clear by current events and financial upheavals since 2008 is that the global economy has become truly that -- global.

The near meltdown we experienced a few years ago made it clear that our economic health depended on dependence on each other to do the right thing.

We are now closer to having an economic community in the best sense of the term -- we work with each other for the benefit of all.

I think we've all become aware of the fact that our cultures and economics are intertwined. It's a complex mosaic that cannot be approached with a simple formula for the correct pattern to emerge. In many ways, we are in unchartered waters.

The good news, in one respect, is that what is done affects us all. There won't be any winners or losers as this is not a competition. It's a time for working together for the best of all involved. Never before has the phrase "we're all in this together" had more resonance or relevance.

My concern is that the negligence of a few will adversely affect the majority. I've long been a believer in the "look at the solution, not the problem" theory. In this case, the solution is clear. We will have to leave borders behind and go for global unity when it comes to financial stability."

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/01/22/business/opinion-donald-trump-europe/

{emphasis added}

Oh, no. Michael has "met the enemy," and the "enemy" by his own definition is... in fact... a Trump voter! I guess it's not easy being the easy mark of a con artist extraordinaire. :D

Either way, you'll never hear from me again about the issue....

But ignoring the message and attacking the messenger will simply make me MORE prolific on the issue..

Because your inability to actually ADDRESS the issue *PROVES* I am dead on ballz accurate...

But, as usual, you just want to IGNORE the facts because they don't sit with your ideology-driven existence..,.

I mean, seriously.... If I were wrong, it would be very VERY easy to prove me wrong..

Simply provide to me a comment from you where you condemned violence from the Left Wingery in the same manner and intensity that you have condemned violence from the Right Wingery and without any prompting from me whatsoever...

Let me give you an example:

While we can't be sure if they even identify as Democrats, we have to condemn the violence at University of California, Berkeley this week. A rabid right-winger was scheduled to speak and a non-violent protest against the event was hijacked by a small group who set fires, lit off fireworks (at police, reportedly), and smashed windows.

Violence definitely gets media attention at protests, but it also is just as counterproductive, since it rarely (if ever) convinces anyone of the righteousness of your cause -- no matter how noble that cause might be.
-CW

That's a low key example of what I am talking about. It's milquetoast and full of extenuations and mitigations... But at least it's condemnation.. Unprompted and unsolicited brought about SOLELY to condemn reprehensible and disgusting behavior, irregardless of which Party it is...

If I *AM* wrong, you should be able to show me something like that from you or any of the Weigantian netizens....

The fact that ya'all simply respond with complaints on how tedious and boring the issue is PROVES that ya'all CAN'T prove me wrong..

As I said, it's very easy to get me to stop with this tediousness and boringness....

Prove me wrong or concede the fact that ya'all are SOLELY driven by Party Ideology and Loyalty when it comes to being against violence...

Hay, I just go with what works... :)

It's very easy to get me to stop..

Either provide FACTS that disprove my conclusion or concede the point..

But, as usual, you just want to IGNORE the facts because they don't sit with your ideology-driven existence..,.

This statement sounds like groupthink.

As a Left Winger, you would be the expert. :D

Sorry, no, NOT hurting. See above for what I said about you projecting your fantasy onto my reality.

I was just going by what you said when you said how you had to recover from President Trump's election...

This is a good question, however, not likely to be answered sufficiently by me since I'm not a psychiatrist/psychologist.

So, you need a shrink to explain why YOU think that the size of President Trump's hands matter to you??

How typically Left Winger.. :^/

You see how illiberal you have become??

No.

Of course you don't. It's so ingrained in who you are that you can't even recognize it, let alone acknowledge it..

Yea, act like all those other POTUSES who ran this country into the ground!! :^/

One hundred percent of patriotic Americans elected Donald Trump to that position..

This statement sounds like groupthink.

I know that hurts, but the facts are the facts..

Sorry, no, NOT hurting. See above for what I said about you projecting your fantasy onto my reality.
¯\_(?)_/¯ *LOL*

And the size of his hands matter... how exactly??

This is a good question, however, not likely to be answered sufficiently by me since I'm not a psychiatrist/psychologist. In layman's terms the answer is this: It shouldn't exactly matter and doesn't matter to me from the standpoint of pure size alone, but only a person with zero perception whatsoever would fail to notice that size matters to him, and therefore... from that standpoint ... I think it merits at least a wee bit of concern.

A good deal of Trump's "charm" is dependent on how fervently an individual identifies with Trump's "group" and to what degree a person feels that Trump personifies him/her. If a person thinks they and their group are the "real Americans" and believe Trump symbolizes "real America" or "patriotic Americans"... despite all the evidence to the contrary staring them right in the face... they're likely to view Trump as a charismatic leader. Those that don't fall under that spell see the man for what he actually is: an obsessed con artist extraordinaire.

Trump is a self-centered, self-absorbed blowhard who for whatever reason is obsessed with proving that he and/or his ilk measure up (that obsession with size) while those who don't share his beliefs and/or his worldview are somehow flawed... the dehumanization of the opponent whether it's the media, a judge, a politician, etc. Propaganda is a means to that end.

Poor Donald, he is delusional. He thinks that because "many people are saying it" or "many people agree" that repetition of propaganda can somehow magically turn a load of utter BS into a fact. The irony is that the more he actually obsesses over and repeats the same BS, the more ridiculous he looks and sounds to the majority of Americans.

So I ask you: What's your obsession? That's a rhetorical question that doesn't require an answer but one you might give some thoughtful consideration. The answer oozes freely through almost every comment you make. You are so very much like your orange idol. :)

You see how illiberal you have become??

No.

You are EXACTLY as you accuse Republicans of being...

Might you direct me to a link where I accuse Republicans of being ?_______? so I'll know EXACTLY what you're obsessing about? Perhaps you are again projecting your fantasy onto my reality?
¯\_(?)_/¯

We have met the enemy and it is you....

By "we" do you mean Republicans? Because you keep claiming you are not a slave to any party whilst the party rhetoric simultaneously positively oozes from almost every comment you post. Ironic, iddn't it?

Yea?? Point to me where you EVER condemned the violence from the Left Wingery..

You can't because NO ONE here ever has...

Your repetitive cut-and-paste rhetoric grows tiresome and boring. Seriously... if you're looking for someone to spew your worldview or your brand of dehumanization and/or groupthink, the rhetoric from the right-wing fringes of Alex Jones and Breitbart are merely but a few clicks away. :)

No.. My definition of patriotic Americans is someone that DOESN'T vote for the candidate who wants open borders and wants a world order run by globalist corporations where America is simply one of the cogs in a huge wheel, no better than any other cog...

I know it's a harsh thing to say, but the facts are the facts..

Hillary Clinton was the candidate of the globalist corporatist status quo.. Hillary Clinton was the candidate who explicitly STATED she wanted open borders..

How can voting for THAT be considered patriotic??

In other words, voting for Hillary Clinton is NOT patriotic..

Michale's definition of patriotic Americans are Americans who believe 45's lies.

He has no idea what patriotism or being American is.

In his America we'd still be subjects of the British Crown because dissent and free thinking are not allowed. He simply can't stand that thinking, educated people can see through the painted clown he worships so he has to pretend, along with the pathetic caesar-wannabee whose toes he desperately wants to kiss that anybody who thinks differently isn't really American.

"One hundred percent of patriotic Americans elected Donald Trump to that position.."

SO, the rest of US who did NOT vote for Trump are somehow NOT patriotic Americans???? What are we, living in the OLD Soviet Union now????

:D

Ya gotta wonder when the Left Wingery and it's lapdog media will quit embarrassing itself.. :D

But, credit where credit is due..

Yes, you are dead on ballz accurate...

It *OUGHT* to be condemned by ya'all...

The point is, when it comes to violence and destruction from the LEFT.... *IT NEVER IS*

THAT is the irrefutable and inarguable fact...

One hundred percent of patriotic Americans elected Donald Trump to that position..

I know that hurts, but the facts are the facts..

who resembles that remark and whom we should all be wishing well because he's now literally got our lives and our futures in his tiny little hands.

And the size of his hands matter... how exactly??

You see how illiberal you have become??

You are EXACTLY as you accuse Republicans of being...

We have met the enemy and it is you....

You think your "vagina" comment is rational and logical?

Not only is it rational and logical, it is factual.. Or did you miss all the vagina hats??

My response wasn't meant to be name calling but rather to elucidate my impression of the tone of your comment

YOUR impression of my comment..

But it's the impression of a person who has been WRONG at EVERY point in this campaign..

Never forget that... :D

When it gets violent, regardless of what the perp is wearing on their head, it ought to be condemned by us all.

Yea?? Point to me where you EVER condemned the violence from the Left Wingery..

You can't because NO ONE here ever has...

And someone who responds to a rational and logical assessment with childish and immature name-calling is part of the problem, not part of the solution..

I agree such a person is not "part of the solution," but nevertheless the minority of Americans has elected a POTUS who resembles that remark and whom we should all be wishing well because he's now literally got our lives and our futures in his tiny little hands.

You think your "vagina" comment is rational and logical? I think that type of comment is indicative of trolling. My response wasn't meant to be name calling but rather to elucidate my impression of the tone of your comment and should be sung to the tune of "Row Row Row Your Boat."

Even if that were true, you still remain silent and defend those who do...

In short, same difference. :D

In short, utter BS and your same old tired lame argument. You have basically two arguments that are generally surrounded by a lot of noise, and we've all seen them both and... yawn... stretch... yawn. This ain't rocket science. I will defend anyone's right to peacefully protest whether they are wearing white bed sheets on their heads or those new pink hats. When it gets violent, regardless of what the perp is wearing on their head, it ought to be condemned by us all. This is not that complicated a concept. :)

ANYONE who wears a vagina on their head is a few fries short of a Happy Meal and, as such, is not worth listening to BECAUSE they are a few fries short of a Happy Meal...

Your name calling skills are weak so I would work on that if you aspire to be "presidential." I have a ready-made slogan for your gimme cap too:

***** MAKE AMERICA EIGHT AGAIN *****

But, unlike most everyone here, I am HAPPY to be proven wrong..

Simply point to a person or a time where wearing a vagina on one's head actually created or elicited something positive in society..

I await with eager anticipation.. :D

And someone who responds to a rational and logical assessment with childish and immature name-calling is part of the problem, not part of the solution..

I can honestly say I've never worn a vagina on my head, and I would take care with comments such as this since people might naturally see through the projection of your fantasy onto my reality.

Even if that were true, you still remain silent and defend those who do...

In short, same difference. :D

ANYONE who wears a vagina on their head is a few fries short of a Happy Meal and, as such, is not worth listening to BECAUSE they are a few fries short of a Happy Meal...

And I believe that someone who wears a vagina on their head is not objective, logical and rational enough to answer the question.. :D

Troll, troll, troll your boat gently down the stream... *LOL*

I can honestly say I've never worn a vagina on my head, and I would take care with comments such as this since people might naturally see through the projection of your fantasy onto my reality. ¯\_(?)_/¯

The rioting, the assaults, the hate, the destruction, the looting... ALL at the hands of Democrats...

They are VERY counter-productive to the Left Wingery making inroads with patriotic Americans.

Ignoring that it's happening and the Left's inability to take responsibility for the actions is making things very much harder for the Democrats..

I know, I know... Ya'all claim that it's just a few malcontents, that's it's not reflective of the Democrat Party..

BUT...

But here's the thing and there is just NO DENYING it..

Unless the Democrat Party *FORCEFULLY* and *UNEQUIVOCALLY* condemns the actions of these alleged few malcontents....

Well, then the Democrat Party OWNS those malcontents and their actions...

It's THAT simple....

Ya'all know that I am correct in this... You just refuse to acknowledge it...

You mean the people who generate the wealth that the lay about red state whiners spend?

Those people - who create the jobs, the new industries that keep America in a forefront economically? Those people, who are educated and empathic?

Why doesn't this clown go back to Russia with all his fiends?

There is absolutely NO FACTUAL evidence to support the claim that Hillary lost because she was a woman..

Oh, I totally agree. Did you happen to get the gist of what I wrote there and just chose to ignore it in your reply?

You stated, quote: the mere fact that we elected a black American as President proves that INSTITUTIONALIZED racism is dead in America..

If you'll read what I actually wrote, I was simply stating that PO's election is no more proof that institutionalized racism is dead in America than HRC's loss is proof that institutionalized gender bias is alive and well. Neither PO's win nor HRC's loss proves anything of the sort regarding institutionalized bias.

There is overwhelming factual evidence to support the claim that a woman could easily be President..

Again, I totally agree. The 2016 election vote totals alone support this fact.

FACTS
48.2% of Americans voted for Clinton.
46.1% of Americans voted for Trump.
53.9% of Americans did NOT vote for Trump.

Americans didn't want THAT woman to be President...

Based on the votes of Americans, there is a better argument that Americans didn't want "THAT man."

While I believe it's an overreach to conclude that "Americans didn't want THAT woman," because HRC lost the Electoral College system, I do believe that she totally blew the election. I myself am not one of those people hung up on "why," but notwithstanding all the various assorted talking points regarding "why," I think it's delusional to blame anyone not named Clinton or associated with the Clinton campaign for her loss. Enough said.

Under our Electoral College system, Donald Trump becomes the 45th President of the United States regardless of the fact that the majority did NOT vote for President Trump... PT. This was quite obvious on election day and just "is what it is."

I will also say I have never seen such a sore winner in my entire life! *LOL* "My crowd was the biglyest!" *LOL* Poor Donald... his crowd could best be described as "anemic." :) Some of us there actually voted for HRC.

Moving forward, you can save the whiny response from the fringe of the right-wing bubble that Trump would have won the popular vote if not for ALL those 3-5 million "illegals" who ALL voted for HRC or if you exclude an entire large state or two. *LOL* Based on this BS, one could equally argue that Trump's electoral vote victory came entirely from Texas, and if you just take out Texas... blah, blah, blah... utter nonsense to argue either way regarding removing California or New York or Texas, and there's no evidence whatsoever of 3-5 million "illegals" who ALL voted for Hillary. Texas is full of "illegals," and Trump won Texas so... Also utter nonsense to say that Trump would have campaigned differently and won the popular vote if not for our Electoral College system since HRC would have obviously also campaigned differently under that same scenario. :) Based on right-wing bubble rhetoric, I imagine HRC would have still won the popular vote in a nationwide popular vote election since ALL the illegals voted for her, and without the constraints of the EC system, HRC would have campaigned in Texas and pockets of America full of "illegals," and that would have naturally given her the edge since... as Trump concedes, ALL the "illegals" voted for HRC and would have no doubt given her the win in a nationwide election by popular vote... and my apologies to those who don't get sarcasm. :)

Moving forward, Trump won with a minority of voters, and his crowds as well as the crowds in DC and nationwide on the day after his inauguration were indicative of this fact, but he needs to get over it already!

You're the POTUS now, PT, act like it... please instead of a 5-year-old. :D

So, go ahead — rage, riot, demonstrate, burn, dress up, march, protest, pout, sing, make speeches, resist, vandalize and denounce me as much as you want. I am deplorable, and I am happier with my vote every day.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/commentary/ct-trump-voter-happy-deplorable-perspec-0206-md-20170203-story.html

The Internet is alive with so many dead on ballz accurate commentaries today!! :D

Whatever one thinks of the Electoral College, it was the law which decides the winner, something the Clinton Campaign itself acknowledged when it boasted of their “many paths to 270 electoral college votes” prior to the election.
http://www.tennessean.com/story/opinion/columnists/2017/02/04/wave-illiberalism-present-liberal-quarters-today/97407608/

I am trying to stay away from posting entire articles, but it was hard with this one because everything it says is so dead on ballz accurate..

I highly recommend it and would be VERY curious if anyone here can dispute any part of it..

A serious discussion on this articles points is what is needed to bring the Democrat Party in from the cold..

But, sadly for the Left (and many Weigantians here) it requires a good long cold hard objective look in the mirror...

And there are very VERY few on the Left willing to go there...

THIS is your normal average every day cop... 99% of the cops are like this...

But all the majority of the Left (and many MANY on the Right) sees is a racist killer...

I would wager to say that the vast majority of the people (on both the Right AND the Left) who hate cops do so because they did something stoopid that was totally and completely their fault and the cops arrested them for it..

It's going to be a very, very long four years.

Look at the bright side, Liz...

At least the Atlanta Falcons won the popular vote... :D

Yep, yep, yep..

This is the EXACT problem facing the Democrat Party...

On the one side, they have the Hysterical Left, the Professional Left who wants it's Democrats in government to be as mean, nasty and obstructionist as the Left has accused the Right of being..

On the other side, they have the pragmatists, the ones who know that compromise is what makes government work...

I have a feeling it's going to be the Hysterical Left that is going to win this civil war and the result will be a Democrat Part that will be the Minority Party for the rest of my life..

I have to say that such a thought brings a smile to my face.. :D

Of course, I had a smile on my face when I voted for President Obama as well. So, things COULD change..

But, for now? I am one happy camper!! :D

Yep, yep, yep..

This is the EXACT problem facing the Democrat Party...

On the one side, they have the Hysterical Left, the Professional Left who wants it's Democrats in government to be as mean, nasty and obstructionist as the Left has accused the Right of being..

On the other side, they have the pragmatists, the ones who know that compromise is what makes government work...

I have a feeling it's going to be the Hysterical Left that is going to win this civil war and the result will be a Democrat Part that will be the Minority Party for the rest of my life..

I have to say that such a thought brings a smile to my face.. :D

Of course, I had a smile on my face when I voted for President Obama as well. So, things COULD change..

But, for now? I am one happy camper!! :D

And, once again, anti-President Trump and anti-America hatred loses.... Big Time!!! :D

It was obviously Brady's support of President Trump that made all the difference!! :D heh

I was more than happy to ask him this. His response was: "What impropriety?"

You must have asked him the wrong question..

I wanted to know his opinion on the APPEARANCE of impropriety.. :D

Because there was PLENTY of that..

Regardless, I think I have my answer.. :D

The decision to arrest is not based on RACE, it is based on the law!

EXACTLY!!

And THAT is the point that is ignored over and over and over..

Black people wouldn't be arrested if they didn't break the law...

There were lots of things in Ferguson that sounded awful in the DOJ's report, but almost all of those were within the citizens ability to change for themselves.

Once again, dead on ballz accurate...

Here is my issue with the DOJ's findings on Ferguson... It was not that their findings were incorrect regarding the city's actions, it was that the report failed to put the city's dynamics into context with it's conclusions.

Ferguson's population is roughly 75% black and 25% white. The white population is mainly those over 50 years of age. When the stats are presented for traffic stops that resulted in arrests for each race, it appears that only black drivers ever get arrested... And that may very well be the truth; But WHY that is is never addressed! It doesn't note that the majority of arrests stemmed from drivers having outstanding warrants that require the officer to arrest the person. It never takes into consideration that the only reason that all six people arrested for resisting arrest were black was because the only six people to physically resist arrest just happened to be black! Had a Latino or Asian person chosen to physically resist arrest, the police would have gladly included them in their stats!

The decision to arrest is not based on RACE, it is based on the law!

Ferguson was trashed in the report for the city's local ordinances and fines that the city had used as a big part of their operating budgets. The city had created a legal web that citizens would get trapped in that caused financial damages that were outrageous. The report failed to point out that these ordinances and fines could have been removed from the books by the city council at any point in the city's history. This didn't just occur overnight, it had been on-going for years!

Why wasn't something done to stop these horrible things???

Because NO ONE cared enough to do so!

The black community in Ferguson were "victims" that didn't seem to mind being victims. They had no black city council members because no one wanted to do the job. They held a majority in the population, but had almost no involvement in the city government. Ferguson PD had no black officers I believe, but I seriously doubt that was due to them turning away black applicants!

Racism in any form is a horrible thing that we should all strive to put down. There were lots of things in Ferguson that sounded awful in the DOJ's report, but almost all of those were within the citizens ability to change for themselves. I believe a lot of good came out of the DOJ's report, overall.

How did he feel about Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation?? I mean, if the mere appearance of impropriety pisses him off (which I whole-heartedly agree with) I would imagine he was not a huge Hillary fan.

I am not asking to be a prick, I am sincerely curious..

I was more than happy to ask him this. His response was: "What impropriety?" The Clinton Foundation has one of the best rankings amongst non-profit charities. Have there been investigations that found any evidence that suggests illegal activities occurred? No. Devon believes the FBI would have charged her with any criminal action that warranted a charge if it existed. Clinton did not benefit from gifts given to the foundation in any way.

"If this guy (you) is former law enforcement, just ask him to provide the statutes that were violated by Clinton and the evidence to back the charges up. If we have no faith in investigations conducted by law enforcement, then our country is doomed."

Now, just for the record, this is a very appropriate and entirely correct use of the, ah, word 'um'.

:-)

https://www.84lumber.com/

They are betting on 45's hatred losing big time.

Comments???

And, conversely, the Right was clamoring for Hillary's medical records, but WEREN'T clamoring for President Trump's tax records..

And so it goes and so it goes..

That's why I think that it should be universal across the board disclosure, regardless of candidate..

Disclose EVERYTHING....

Yes, and I realize how unwieldy that could be...

I wasn't sure why you were talking about the why of group protection behavior in the context of my comment... but then I responded to your comment rather than remaining focused on the context myself.

But going back, WHY it happens is sort of a distraction from the point THAT it happens.

There's an awful lot of denial about it.

And going back further to white supremacists in law enforcement, we wouldn't even know the FBI see it as a problem if the secret report hadn't been leaked.

You would think the people of a diverse nation would be entitled to know about something with such widespread implications.

Listen mentioned needed scrutiny of the FBI itself, and the fact that the report was kept secret seems to support that.

"The first instinct for groups is to announce that they will police themselves"

And they keep claiming it's sufficient despite the decades of evidence that it isn't.
In other words, we are well beyond "first instincts".
Your reference to third party review in the UK, which happens to be a reform supported by BLM, is actively opposed by law enforcement groups.

Go figure.
Head in the sand until an anonymous pollster comes around.

And, again, going back to the white supremacists in law enforcement problem, they aren't even promising to police themselves.

A

... if he knows what's good for him, that is. :)

Yes, all things being equal, I would agree with that..

But, during the campaign, all things WEREN'T equal.. The Left as clamoring for President Trump's tax records but WEREN'T clamoring for Hillary's health records...

During the 2012 election, the Left was clamoring for Romney's tax records, but WEREN'T clamoring for Obama's School Records...

I am for COMPLETE disclosure from candidates...

Exactly..

And, since ISIS has NOT been ousted from Iraq's territory, then it's logical that President Obama would want to limit immigration from Iraq...

How does it make sense to say to these Iraqi fighters and their families that they cannot even visit the US? What message does that send to Iraq and its citizens?

It sends a message, "Once you get your house clean, then we'll talk..."

Put another way... If you have a family where one is really really sick, wouldn't you want them to get that person well BEFORE they visit you and your family??

I think you need to seriously contemplate your answer before tapping out a response.

Oh I did. :D

Michale would agree with that. Absolutely, positively, unequivocally. I'm being serious here, I'm not trying to be facetious.

... if he knows what's good for him, that is. :)

Tax returns?

AND health records...

The Iraqi military is currently engaged in a mission to oust ISIS from its territory and is working with the US military and US advisors to accomplish this task.

How does it make sense to say to these Iraqi fighters and their families that they cannot even visit the US? What message does that send to Iraq and its citizens?

I think you need to seriously contemplate your answer before tapping out a response.

That's my personal belief...

Tax returns?

I did not. I don't have the time at the moment to look at it with any serious consideration..

And I know you well enough to know that you WANT me to give it serious consideration. :D

First off, it was President Obama's list, not President Trump's...

And, considering how close ISIS and Iraq are, no.. I don't think President Obama putting Iraq on the list was a mistake....

Would you agree that putting Iraq on the list of countries included in the temporary travel restrictions outlined in President Trump's executive order was a colossal mistake that could have very serious and negative consequences for America's national security?

What I am saying is that, if one chooses to run for POTUS, ANY expectation of privacy is rendered void...

ANYTHING and EVERYTHING in a candidate's life should be open to disclosure and scrutiny...

If you want things to remain private, then don't run for POTUS...

That's my personal belief...

Touche' :D When it comes to being brutally honest about the Clintons, you definitely give me a good run for the money.. :D

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_trump_job_approval-6179.html

His approval numbers have jumped 6 points since he issued his Counter-Terrorist Executive Order...

There you go again, confusing yourself with me!

Once, maybe..

Twice is a pattern...

I am not saying it's the SOLE reason..

But it is undeniable that ya'all underestimated President Trump at EVERY juncture.. AND you cited this exact kind of issue when you did...

I am simply pointing out that the man ya'all describe simply CANNOT be as successful as President Trump has been..

And YOU have no facts to support any other conclusion...

And ya'all think *I* am brutal to the Clintons?? :D

but if you don't serve your country you get a free ride?

I don't think Michale was suggesting that.

Blame it on the comment format ... but, I still think this is the best comment format ever, except, of course, for the missing edit function. :)

Yes, no evidence. The evidence is as strong that outrageous hair resulted in his win as his childish behavior.

You need to establish a direct link between deliberate childishness and voter decisions. So far you have provided no evidence beyond "he did x and won, so x must have been the reason".

When it comes to picking our POTUS, there is no such thing as TOO much information...

I thought we were talking about mandated documents required for statewide office in California?

I suggested Tax Returns and it snowballed from there.

No evidence??

Trump demolished the GOP field...

Trumps decimated the biggest, meanest and most well-funded political juggernaut in the history of the planet...

No evidence my left arse cheek.. :D

I don't think that is what Michale was suggesting. He was just adding military service records, should they exist, into the fray of what should be looked into when it comes to choosing people for high public office.