ADVERTISEMENT

Reasons Trump Should Feel Confident Going Into Early Voting

In no way do I think either candidate embodies what I'd like. The policies of the GOP are much much more aligned with the 3 principles I listed. If you think Democrats have protected citizens, enforced laws, or protected the weakest in society (including children & the unborn) you're just way off base.
I do understand your point of view now.

But I do not argue with zealots or religious dead enders.
 
In no way did Trump “bring economic stability”. Every economic indicator was trending positively when he took office, and he used a massive tax cut that added to the deficit to juice the trends that were already establish.

All of this doesn't matter. Weak candidates lose elections. He will lose. If he was gonna win, it wouldn't be close. Heck, it may not be close anyway...in a loss.
They are both weak. The left is counting on the smoke and mirrors deceiving the easily manipulated 18 to 30 demographic into thinking Kamala is not who she says she is or who she has shown herself to be.
 
Source? I’m not saying you are wrong, but you’re remaking a statement of fact that would leave me to believe you have irrefutable proof. As I’m still paying taxes in Atlanta, I’d like to see that.

All they wanted to do was feel safe in their community. A quote at the bottom of this article. There are twenty others I can link. This one is more slanted to the left. And still bad. It is like everything else. Nothing to see here. This is the extreme measure it took to get lefty politicians to look beyond the stats and hire some more police.

I just noticed a good friend from newnan was quoted in that article.
 
Last edited:
no. it's not.

closing the border would be both rule by fiat and economic suicide - but of course no one who proposes this ever has any idea what it would look like, so it's not worth arguing.

enforcing the laws is what we've done - but the laws are broken, which is why we need legislation and have for a couple decades now. Trump killed the latest push, as we all know.
And you call me an ideologue... You should work for the KH campaign, you really know how to put spin on things
 
I prefer you silent.

Biden chose to drop out. He could have run with little support. He chose to drop out for the good of the country.

Again, you can't force people to give money to a campaign they don't fully support.

Explain where I'm wrong. You don't have one shred of proof. Just as Will called you out the other day. You try to act as if you are a voice of reason here when you believe almost every conspiracy theory out there.
heston-laugh-slow-smooth.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: DawglegrightinSC

All they wanted to do was feel safe in their community. A quote at the bottom of this article. There are twenty others I can link. This one is more slanted to the left. And still bad. It is like everything else. Nothing to see here. This is the extreme measure it took to get lefty politicians to look beyond the stats and hire some more police.

I just noticed a good friend from newnan was quoted in that article.
Zinger, this is a great example of where some of these discussions go sideways. Here is your statement:

"Example of facts not being facts. Crime is down according to the stats in Atlanta. Prosecuted crime is down. Crime is actually rampant and unchecked."

That's a statement of fact, so I asked for a source that supported your assertion. The article about the efforts of Buckhead to leave Atlanta had zero hard crime statistics. I know people who were on both sides of this effort, and it was complex to say the least. Also, that article is from when the effort ended eighteen months ago, so it can't even contain an opinion regarding the current crime statistics in Atlanta, much less any facts that support the notions that current statistics about crime in Atlanta are lies and crime is actually "rampant and unchecked".

So you complain about facts not being facts, make a very clear assertion of fact, and then have nothing to offer when the source of your assertion is requested. See the irony?

And you call me an ideologue... You should work for the KH campaign, you really know how to put spin on things
Sorry, Blayne. Anyone who quotes specific scripture during a political discussion is by definition an ideologue.
 
Zinger, this is a great example of where some of these discussions go sideways. Here is your statement:

"Example of facts not being facts. Crime is down according to the stats in Atlanta. Prosecuted crime is down. Crime is actually rampant and unchecked."

That's a statement of fact, so I asked for a source that supported your assertion. The article about the efforts of Buckhead to leave Atlanta had zero hard crime statistics. I know people who were on both sides of this effort, and it was complex to say the least. Also, that article is from when the effort ended eighteen months ago, so it can't even contain an opinion regarding the current crime statistics in Atlanta, much less any facts that support the notions that current statistics about crime in Atlanta are lies and crime is actually "rampant and unchecked".

So you complain about facts not being facts, make a very clear assertion of fact, and then have nothing to offer when the source of your assertion is requested. See the irony?


Sorry, Blayne. Anyone who quotes specific scripture during a political discussion is by definition an ideologue.
Willdup, scripture shapes my worldview. I cannot separate the two. It's not being an ideologue it's called faith and it is the foundation of everything in my life. You don't have to agree. You don't have to like it or respect it even. Thank God we live in a country (which was shaped by Judeo-Christian values btw) in which we have First Amendment rights and protections.
 
Willdup, scripture shapes my worldview. I cannot separate the two. It's not being an ideologue it's called faith and it is the foundation of everything in my life. You don't have to agree. You don't have to like it or respect it even. Thank God we live in a country (which was shaped by Judeo-Christian values btw) in which we have First Amendment rights and protections.
Amen, but getting unbelievers to understand where and who we get our core beliefs is futile. We can only offer grace and pray that they find the same peace that we are blessed with through the Holy Spirit.
 
You’re not going to get an argument out of me that there could have been a higher quality candidate. Oddly enough though, he was actually elected to the nomination, unlike Kamala Harris. That subversion of the electoral process and the covering up of Biden’s cognitive is a scandal of epic proportions and would be all the media would be talking about if it happened on the GOP side.

I wish Trump was more disciplined and a better man. However, his policies are much better for this country and the closest to my own personal beliefs (with a few major differing points I’ll admit). Harris and the Dems’ policies will continue to cripple America domestically and abroad and are quite literally an affront to my personal and religious beliefs on many many levels
I couldn't have said it better myself.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cherrydawg
Zinger, this is a great example of where some of these discussions go sideways. Here is your statement:

"Example of facts not being facts. Crime is down according to the stats in Atlanta. Prosecuted crime is down. Crime is actually rampant and unchecked."

That's a statement of fact, so I asked for a source that supported your assertion. The article about the efforts of Buckhead to leave Atlanta had zero hard crime statistics. I know people who were on both sides of this effort, and it was complex to say the least. Also, that article is from when the effort ended eighteen months ago, so it can't even contain an opinion regarding the current crime statistics in Atlanta, much less any facts that support the notions that current statistics about crime in Atlanta are lies and crime is actually "rampant and unchecked".

So you complain about facts not being facts, make a very clear assertion of fact, and then have nothing to offer when the source of your assertion is requested. See the irony?


Sorry, Blayne. Anyone who quotes specific scripture during a political discussion is by definition an ideologue.
This is exactly what I am talking about too. Like you wanting a smoking gun with Biden selling out the country. Or a smoking gun that fraud happened in the last election. There can’t be in either. One because Joe isn’t an idiot and has maintained plausible deniability. Of course he lied numerous times about not knowing these folks. It was proven he did. Beside the point. The other because there is no way to prove anything.

You ask for facts and a whole community wanted to leave because they were being targeted. And felt unsafe. They were being told stats were down by people like you. While over and over again they were being robbed or mugged. With no reprocussions because there were too little resources at the time. So the money in buckhead got together and said we will fix this ourselves. See if you can survive without us. What happened next. Tons of law enforcement were hired and resources were given. You can figure things out by actions and what people are saying too will. You aren’t that dense are you. Why go to those lengths unless it was really bad. I am sure another denial or deflection will be coming. Why did they want to leave will? I talked to hundreds of people over there too. They all said the same thing. You just don’t want to hear that.
 
Willdup, scripture shapes my worldview. I cannot separate the two. It's not being an ideologue it's called faith and it is the foundation of everything in my life. You don't have to agree. You don't have to like it or respect it even. Thank God we live in a country (which was shaped by Judeo-Christian values btw) in which we have First Amendment rights and protections.
Amen, but getting unbelievers to understand where and who we get our core beliefs is futile. We can only offer grace and pray that they find the same peace that we are blessed with through the Holy Spirit.
I'm not criticizing your or anyone else's religious beliefs or the role that those beliefs play in your value system. I actually do appreciate the commitment you and others make to living your faith.

But it doesn't make you any less of an ideologue. Here is the Websters definition:

- an often blindly partisan advocate or adherent of a particular ideology.

As you yourself stated, your beliefs are a matter of faith, faith in your interpretation of the Bible and belief in the Holy Trinity. Given that all religions, including Christianity, require faith in that which cannot be proven, and given the fact you are a "blind" adherent to this ideology given it requires faith in that which cannot be proven, I think that qualifies you as an ideologue.

We could probably have a long and interesting debate about this point, and I don't share my perspective on the topic in an effort to be "right" in my views. I do it more to try and communicate why people who do not share your and others religious views would consider you an ideologue.

This is exactly what I am talking about too. Like you wanting a smoking gun with Biden selling out the country. Or a smoking gun that fraud happened in the last election. There can’t be in either. One because Joe isn’t an idiot and has maintained plausible deniability. Of course he lied numerous times about not knowing these folks. It was proven he did. Beside the point. The other because there is no way to prove anything.

You ask for facts and a whole community wanted to leave because they were being targeted. And felt unsafe. They were being told stats were down by people like you. While over and over again they were being robbed or mugged. With no reprocussions because there were too little resources at the time. So the money in buckhead got together and said we will fix this ourselves. See if you can survive without us. What happened next. Tons of law enforcement were hired and resources were given. You can figure things out by actions and what people are saying too will. You aren’t that dense are you. Why go to those lengths unless it was really bad. I am sure another denial or deflection will be coming. Why did they want to leave will? I talked to hundreds of people over there too. They all said the same thing. You just don’t want to hear that.
Zinger, again you couldn't have made my point better for me if you tried. You appeal to emotion, fear, conjecture, speculation and insults to respond to being called out for making a statement of fact with no support.

It's simple. Either you have a credible source for your contention that current crime statistics in Atlanta are lies and that crime has gotten worse, not better, or you don't. Insulting me as dense doesn't help your argument.
 
I'm not criticizing your or anyone else's religious beliefs or the role that those beliefs play in your value system. I actually do appreciate the commitment you and others make to living your faith.

But it doesn't make you any less of an ideologue. Here is the Websters definition:

- an often blindly partisan advocate or adherent of a particular ideology.

As you yourself stated, your beliefs are a matter of faith, faith in your interpretation of the Bible and belief in the Holy Trinity. Given that all religions, including Christianity, require faith in that which cannot be proven, and given the fact you are a "blind" adherent to this ideology given it requires faith in that which cannot be proven, I think that qualifies you as an ideologue.

We could probably have a long and interesting debate about this point, and I don't share my perspective on the topic in an effort to be "right" in my views. I do it more to try and communicate why people who do not share your and others religious views would consider you an ideologue.


Zinger, again you couldn't have made my point better for me if you tried. You appeal to emotion, fear, conjecture, speculation and insults to respond to being called out for making a statement of fact with no support.

It's simple. Either you have a credible source for your contention that current crime statistics in Atlanta are lies and that crime has gotten worse, not better, or you don't. Insulting me as dense doesn't help your argument.
Stats are listed above. I will attach it again. Just didn’t have time to go looking for them then. And to add some emotion to it. While those stats kept getting worse from year to year. The people I talked to over there said at least a third of the crime happening at that time wasn’t reported or even investigated. They started saying what was the point. Nothing was going to happen.
(I said you aren’t that dense)

 
Last edited:
Stats are listed above. I will attach it again. Just didn’t have time to go looking for them then. And to add some emotion to it. While those stats kept getting worse from year to year. The people I talked to over there said at least a third of the crime happening at that time wasn’t reported or even investigated. They started saying what was the point. Nothing was going to happen.
(I said you aren’t that dense)

You are posting articles from eighteen and twenty-four months ago, and those articles do not include hard crime statistics.

"People I talked to" is not a credible source for something as objective as violent crime trends in a city.

Atlanta Mayor Dickens took over in February 2022, and part of the reason the Buckhead effort lost support in the state legislature was because of the mayor's plan to improve crime in the city. So, if you want to prove the fact that you asserted, you really should be focused on the last thirty months and whether crime has improved or not during that time. The Buckhead effort, that ended shortly after he took office, has very little to add to support your assertion.
 
You are posting articles from eighteen and twenty-four months ago, and those articles do not include hard crime statistics.

"People I talked to" is not a credible source for something as objective as violent crime trends in a city.

Atlanta Mayor Dickens took over in February 2022, and part of the reason the Buckhead effort lost support in the state legislature was because of the mayor's plan to improve crime in the city. So, if you want to prove the fact that you asserted, you really should be focused on the last thirty months and whether crime has improved or not during that time. The Buckhead effort, that ended shortly after he took office, has very little to add to support your assertion.
Will you acknowledge that the way the these crime statistics are reported was changed under this administration?
These changes made the process confusing and more difficult. That with so many liberal DA’s not even warrant some offenses as worthy to prosecute. Just like the many crimes in NY committed by illegal aliens and released after their processing. They do not go into the crime statistics because the were not prosecuted because they did not show up for court. This diminishes the actual numbers of crimes being reported. We have seen numerous cases where these criminals had been arrested and released numerous times and not convicted of a crime. So each of those instances does not show up in the crime statistics.
I know you will continue to hold on to and hide behind the show me the facts.
 
no. it's not.

closing the border would be both rule by fiat and economic suicide - but of course no one who proposes this ever has any idea what it would look like, so it's not worth arguing.

enforcing the laws is what we've done - but the laws are broken, which is why we need legislation and have for a couple decades now. Trump killed the latest push, as we all know.
Are you trolling me with this or are you just insane? We are committing economic suicide now. Eric Adams spoke out against it and look what they are doing to him. Look at what its done to NYC and Chicago and California? Their budgets are broken.

Tell me this- if we close the border back to Obama levels, and start deporting the criminals and whoever we can , the amount of money we save would be astronomical. We are currently spending billions on housing , feeding and giving healthcare to illegal immigrants. Do you think at all before you post this nonsense?
 
Will you acknowledge that the way the these crime statistics are reported was changed under this administration?
These changes made the process confusing and more difficult. That with so many liberal DA’s not even warrant some offenses as worthy to prosecute. Just like the many crimes in NY committed by illegal aliens and released after their processing. They do not go into the crime statistics because the were not prosecuted because they did not show up for court. This diminishes the actual numbers of crimes being reported. We have seen numerous cases where these criminals had been arrested and released numerous times and not convicted of a crime. So each of those instances does not show up in the crime statistics.
I know you will continue to hold on to and hide behind the show me the facts.
So, the one violent crime that is not generally subject to reporting manipulation is homicides.

Atlanta Homicides:
2020 - 157
2021 - 158
2022 - 170
2023 - 135 (down 21%)
In 2024, homicides in Atlanta seem to be tracking at a similar pace to last year.

Nationally, homicides are down 13% in the first half of 2024 compared to the same period in 2023.

 
So, the one violent crime that is not generally subject to reporting manipulation is homicides.

Atlanta Homicides:
2020 - 157
2021 - 158
2022 - 170
2023 - 135 (down 21%)
In 2024, homicides in Atlanta seem to be tracking at a similar pace to last year.

Nationally, homicides are down 13% in the first half of 2024 compared to the same period in 2023.

I assume your answer is no.
 
I assume your answer is no.
I'm sorry, what am I answering no to?

Unfortunately, crime statistics and how they get reported is political, I agree, and it has brought uncertainty and speculation into reporting that shouldn't be there.

Thats why I focused on homicides, which as I said are generally the most difficult statistic to manipulate and have been found to track to some degree other violent crimes.
 
You are posting articles from eighteen and twenty-four months ago, and those articles do not include hard crime statistics.

"People I talked to" is not a credible source for something as objective as violent crime trends in a city.

Atlanta Mayor Dickens took over in February 2022, and part of the reason the Buckhead effort lost support in the state legislature was because of the mayor's plan to improve crime in the city. So, if you want to prove the fact that you asserted, you really should be focused on the last thirty months and whether crime has improved or not during that time. The Buckhead effort, that ended shortly after he took office, has very little to add to support your assertion.
It shows the crime stats from 20-21 in a graph in the second article. I will go research more. Not sure why you want this when we both know what happened. Not to mention it was being reported nightly during that time. They were literally warning people to be aware at gas stations and on the street because the car jackings were so rampant. Just more deflection. I am sure the mayor did plan to improve crime in the city. Why did he or she need to improve it. 🤦‍♂️
 
Last edited:
It shows the crime stats from 20-21 in a graph in the second article. I will go research more. Not sure why you want this when we both know what happened. Not to mention it was being reported nightly during that time. They were literally warning people to be aware at gas stations and on the street because the car jackings were so rampant. Just more deflection. I am sure the mayor did plan to improve crime in the city. Why did he or she need to improve it. 🤦‍♂️
It's late 2024, and you may remember that there were some extraordinary circumstances that contributed to crime during 2020 and 2021. You didn't say crime during the pandemic, or crime 2+ years ago, you said current crime.

But I'm deflecting? Keep digging. You'll get to China eventually.
 
It's late 2024, and you may remember that there were some extraordinary circumstances that contributed to crime during 2020 and 2021. You didn't say crime during the pandemic, or crime 2+ years ago, you said current crime.

But I'm deflecting? Keep digging. You'll get to China eventually.
We are arguing the same thing. I never said current stats. I was bringing up an argument I had 3 years ago with a staff member. You assumed it was today’s stats. I just didn’t tattle on him to Radi like you did with Blayne.
 
Again, go back and read about the nominating process.

Biden dropped out. He didn't have to.

You can't make people support a candidate they don't want to support.

You'd have a much bigger point if there was a large swath of Democrats complaining about Harris being the nominee. That didn't happen. Democrats are not angry that she's been chosen. Republicans are. Why is that?
Beating a candidate that's only been running a few weeks and that most of you think is weak, should be easy. Why is it not?

Dem polices have been crippling the US for over three decades now. In the mean time I've seen my conservative friends somehow figure out a way to prosper. Since I've been of voting age: Dem as President: 20 years, Rep. as President: 12 years.

You guys thought a potato could win twice. When it looked like it wasn’t going to happen you bailed on said potato. Kamala was your only choice as they conveniently waited until after primaries, after his polling numbers dropped.

Probably would’ve done the same to Kamala at the DNC had her numbers not looked ok.

You’d have more of an argument if he looked any different at the debate than he has for the last 2 years
 
Never said anything was stolen. Quite the contrary. So if nothing you say is a fact, I can consider everything you say bullshit. Got it.

Example of facts not being facts. Crime is down according to the stats in Atlanta. Proesecuted crime is down. Crime is actually rampant and unchecked. Which is why part of Atlanta tried to secede itself from itself. But keep believing crime is down.

We are arguing the same thing. I never said current stats. I was bringing up an argument I had 3 years ago with a staff member. You assumed it was today’s stats. I just didn’t tattle on him to Radi like you did with Blayne.

I don't think I assumed anything. I read what you wrote above, all of which is in the present tense, and responded to it.

It doesn't really matter. Perhaps just think twice when you are making accusations about other people misstating facts.
 
His ceiling is still 47% of the vote. And he's not picking up new customers this cycle. The fatigue is real. Lots of "couch voters" this time around. That doesn't bode well for him.
Ummm, Rep are registering people (new voters and Dems) in decent numbers. Pennsylvania is doing some amazing work in registering new voters. Not sure where you are getting your intel.
 
Polls and media can say what they want, but every single state & county elections board decision is breaking in Trump’s favor.

Pennsylvania will not count misdated ballots. They also will no longer count ballots without a signature match.

Luzerne County has gotten ride of drop boxes.

Georgia is hand counting all votes in every precinct and making sure they match the totals on the electronic voting machines.

Clark County in Nevada cleaned up 100,000 voters off its rolls in August

Virginia is all paper ballots and removed 6,000 non citizens from its voter rolls.

GA, NC, & PA mail in voting are all way down and a larger percentage of white voters so far.

Anything could happen. Harris could certainly still win, but Trump is better positioned than he’s ever been to win. Now it’s just turning people out.

Virginia early voting has already been very red!
Many good things going on to stop the cheating but still more to counter it. It will be tighter than I want for sure.
 
I keep seeing where those saying Dems aren't practicing Dem by replacing Biden with Harris but I have a question, should the GOP force Mark Robinson out of his race for NC governor? He's going to lose in November but there is the real chance he flips NC to Harris and away from Trump. Because of the up ballot effect he will have on Trump...should the state and national GOP force Robinson to drop out of the race to give Trump a better chance at winning?
 
I keep seeing where those saying Dems aren't practicing Dem by replacing Biden with Harris but I have a question, should the GOP force Mark Robinson out of his race for NC governor? He's going to lose in November but there is the real chance he flips NC to Harris and away from Trump. Because of the up ballot effect he will have on Trump...should the state and national GOP force Robinson to drop out of the race to give Trump a better chance at winning?
No, the deadline has passed. Have to ride it out, regardless of circumstances
 
No, the deadline has passed. Have to ride it out, regardless of circumstances
Really even though it wouldn't be the party actually replacing him but withdrawing funding support that he drops on decline?

And why should it matter about the dealine?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: cherrydawg
There has already been a staff member argue crime stats. From your side. I didn’t report him to radi. Tell him to stay in his lane, or anything else. I am not going to call him out here. I am not sure what side of the isle he is on. He didn’t declare it, but he said crime is down in America according to the stats. Then stayed to argue after several of us told him not to listen to lefty numbers. They are never accurate. The numbers are skewed these days on purpose because crime isn’t prosecuted. We could hit up a target tomorrow you and I if we needed to with no repercussions. The last thing I said was the job reports were supposed to be accurate as well. This person still works for the site. No one reported him. This happened on the vent and moved to the chat. You might be surprised where most of them stand.
Well said. Pretty petty to link in Radi for something like this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cherrydawg
Ummm, Rep are registering people (new voters and Dems) in decent numbers. Pennsylvania is doing some amazing work in registering new voters. Not sure where you are getting your intel.
history says this. He's not any more popular today than he was 8 years ago. He wins in 2016 due to third party candidate getting a certain level of votes. Loses in 2020 for the opposite reason. I predict the same will happen here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: shonuff253
I keep seeing where those saying Dems aren't practicing Dem by replacing Biden with Harris but I have a question, should the GOP force Mark Robinson out of his race for NC governor? He's going to lose in November but there is the real chance he flips NC to Harris and away from Trump. Because of the up ballot effect he will have on Trump...should the state and national GOP force Robinson to drop out of the race to give Trump a better chance at winning?

Trumps wins NC by more than he’ll win GA.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DawglegrightinSC
As I said, I mistakenly thought you were still employed here. My bad.


So Biden was forced out by blackmail and not the fact that his funding dried up and he lost the public support of a many and the private support of even more of his prominent backers, both inside and outside the Beltway? Good to know I can place you firmly in the conspiracy theory camp with PW and others on here.

I understand anyone who feels all abortion is murder voting GOP regardless of who the candidate is and we know that the ultimate goal for that group is a national abortion ban, which you certainly won’t get from Harris or any other Dem candidate. So let’s park that issue for a moment.

Trump tried to overturn the results of the last election. We all watched it happen. That’s why a truly unprecedented number of GOP leaders, his former cabinet, otherwise reliably conservative commentators, and most recently 730 former military, ambassadors and others (including 230 former generals and admirals) have stated they are supporting Harris because Trump is an established threat to our democratic ideals and the Constitution. Two his former Secretaries of Defense say the same thing.

In the history of our country, we have never seen this kind of position taken by so many regarding the threat that a candidate represents. Just as we had never seen a sitting POTUS attempt to steal an election that he lost.

Regarding policy, I’m not sure tariffs and reducing the potential workforce by 10m are going to get you what you want, but the issues are bigger than that regardless.

You should just acknowledge that policy and curtailing abortions are more important than the Constitution and the foundations of our representative republic, because that’s the choice you are making.

Now snitch, I mean will, Either you folks on here that say these things about biden not being forced out are totally blind or are just willfully ignorant, on this topic.

Have you ever seen a party do so much over the 4 years of a presidency to over throw the rightfully elected president as the dims pulled for the 4 years trump was in office. Calling him and illegitimate president all based on LIES. Spent MILLINONS in tax payer dollars trying to end his presidency. Have you ever seen a candidate pay for a pee dossier full of outrageous claims and then have the media spread it as truth and the so called law enforcement agencies of the country use said KNOWN LIES to go after a president knee capping him. Look at how well we were doing until covid even with your party, the deep state, and the media using every dirty trick, lie and underhanded subterfuge to bring him down?

I will talk to you about the constitution you claim to want to protect when you show me that your man biden and girl kamala haven't trampled all over it with the border, with paying college loans etc. It is a hard sell for you to say you care about the constitution sir. You care about stopping trump from being president to the point of voting for a communist. Your candidate is even more guilty. You don't like that he tried to use the courts to prove the election was stolen from him. Nothing unconstitutional about that. When that didn't work., he left office on the day he was supposed to. Biden has used his pen and phone to do things that he has been slapped down for by the supreme court and is still doing them. There is the proof you don't really care about the constitution. Just like you got offended by blaine and tried to rat him out, you don't like mean tweets is all it comes down to.
 
Last edited:
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT