Let's not pretend #Recount2016 is anything more than a fundraising scheme for the Green Party. pic.twitter.com/UWJarRvg6r— Scott Walker (@ScottWalker) November 29, 2016
ADDED: I refrained from retweeting this, but I am blogging it. Blogging and retweeting feel distinctly different to me. Is it the same for you? For me, to retweet would have more of a feeling of endorsement. Blogging it feels more as though I'm saying: Here's what Scott Walker says. Let's talk about it. I'd have to say something more to reveal anything about what's in my head. But I will say a little more. I'm not trying to be coy. What I'll say is that Walker's tweet is pithy but too extreme. He's not only saying there is absolutely no other reason for the recount than to raise money for the Green Party. He's also saying that you'd have to be pretending to point out another motivation. I'm sure I'm not just pretending when I say that the recount effort is also a scheme to get good publicity for the Green Party and to hurt Donald Trump by keeping resistance to the outcome of the election alive.
ALSO: As long as I'm embedding Scott Walker tweets....
Jim Berg & I out hunting. We were walking back to connect with our friend Tom Balistreri. pic.twitter.com/uQ7Bz66uWh
— Scott Walker (@ScottWalker) November 21, 2016
पोस्ट्स
१०४ टिप्पण्या:
On an interview wth Alan Colmes, Stein revealed her evidence that there was hacking.
The polls said Hillary would likely win.
That is the extent of her proof.
The Green Party just now completely disavowed the re-count and Stein's participation in it. And the did it seemingly with prejudice.
...but Stein already got the money and we have to go through with the charade.
...funny that Clinton is more involved than the Greens, ain't it?
7 million dollars would pay for 7 miles of quality road construction.
Addendum: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-11-29/green-party-rebels-against-jill-stein-we-do-not-support-recount
Who is Jill Kelly? It's the smell of Soros sulphur that is arising from this delegitimise and riot trick theater. And satan George needs no fund raising. All he wants is helter-skelter rising until Trump is killed.
Walker is right.
Scott Walker should know that throwing around loose accusations of Russian influence for partisan gain is a fine old Wisconsin tradition.
Of course the Governor is right and it will hurt rather than help her.
Somebody must be thinking they are going to get something from it, but what can it be?
"...to hurt Donald Trump by keeping resistance to the outcome of the election alive."
But it doesn't hurt him; it helps him. Millions of people voted for Trump hesitantly and reluctantly. Nothing has done more to confirm them in the belief that they did the right thing than the left-wing freakout of the past two weeks, including this recount nonsense.
All the more reason to be disgusted by the recount effort. It is not an honest effort to ensure the vote was fair it is an attack on the system that is in place. If the Dems or Greens do not like the electoral college, they are free to change the constitution. The citizens of the US have chosen mostly Republican state control, so until the Democrats or Greens can gain more popular support they should act like grownups and (gasp) stop with the tantrums.
I think this recount is not helping Hillary, the Dems or Stein.
What's in it for Jill Stein, and where is all that money coming from ? Cui Bono, as we used to say in the old neighborhood.
Due to the physical restraints of a tweet the association of words and their meanings is more loose than in other written forms. It's still okay to masturbate over meaning and intent but just keep that in mind...
Where on the internets did I see the discussion, complete with Wayback Machine screenshots, of the sneaky upping of the fundraising goal and steadily increasing estimated legal costs? Initially the cost of the recount was $2 million, then over the course of 2-3 days it became $7 million, and Jill Stein is being cagey about exactly where that money will go.
It makes me sick that it's Christmastime and there are millions of children in this country who don't have the toys, clothes, schools supplies and shoes that they need, and people are sending money into that recount rathole.
Tweets don't let you say more.
Sometimes more needs to be said -- and that doesn't have to be too much.
I think its lowering the quality of communication while greatly increasing the quantity.
With Twitter its an order of magnitude more of the clutter that you get on FB, and which is easy to ignore.
"What's in it for Jill Stein, and where is all that money coming from?"
A. All the money is what's in it for Jill Stein.
B. Gullible/hopeful people.
Think of how many poor people could be helped with $7 million. Imagine how well off we'd all be if we, as a country, decided to stop sending money to politicians and spent the money paying for what we think needs to be done.
I suspect we'd not only get more done but also get a much better class of politician.
Let's not pretend that Walker isn't angling for a job in the Trump administration.
It makes me sick that it's Christmastime and there are millions of children in this country who don't have the toys, clothes, schools supplies and shoes that they need, and people are sending money into that recount rathole.
The kind of people who support the Green Party aren’t the kind of people who would actually pony up to help needy children or some other worthy cause. So the money they sent for the “recount” is less likely to be money that would have gone to Christmas presents for poor kids and more likely money that would have been spent on expensive coffee, Netflix rentals and “medicinal” marijuana.
There's a few reasons--publicity for Green Party, publicity for Stein, an attempt by Stein to ingratiate herself with Clinton voters who think she Nadered them, and a way to capitalize on anti-Trump sentiment. Just by raising money and awareness for this, I'm sure some groups are setting up fundraising and media apparatuses (apparati?) to build their organizations (sort of like the Tea Party of the Left) for the coming years. There's a lot for them to gain by it, and if it seems to piss Trump off (and he cannot hide it if it does) they like it even more.
That said, forget recount--how about a broad investigation? I'm sure we'll find some irregularities, not enough to change any results but at least enough to shed light on what sort of frauds and mistakes are happening around the country. We keep hearing that "voter fraud never happens"--well, let's see now.
Jill Stein - Vive le resistance! "We cannot guarantee a recount will happen in any of these states we are targeting. We can only pledge we will demand recounts in WI and MI and support the voter-initiated effort in PA. If we raise more than what’s needed, the surplus will also go toward election integrity efforts and to promote voting system reform." I am sure all of the idiots donating these millions will appreciate "the resistance" to keep them all the more pissed off for as long as possible.
I agree w Michael. Hotair.com has an excellent in-depth review of the Coleman-Franken recount. That was an exercise acknowledged by all concerned as being up and up, partisan but fairly so, where Franken brought in outside, national recount experts and Coleman went w locals. Typically, Franken/DLF went balls to the wall on everything, and Coleman/Republicans played nice, not wanting to tread on toes. The difference at the beginning was less than 1000, and by the end the swing was less than 1000.
There are two possible outcomes here, ignoring Stein's original "promise": 1.) Trump wins, whereby the angst (violence, social unrest, highway blocking etc) are started anew; or 2.) Clinton wins, by destroying all faith in the integrity of the election process, in finding a minimum of 10,000 (MI) and more votes. Either way, the orderly transition of power premise upon which the country has always operated, like so much since 2000, is further eroded.
Even Laurence Tribe, a Harvard constitutional law professor, said that although recounts are “entirely within the law,” Stein’s effort is probably aimed more at “trying to gain attention and establish herself as a national player.”
There is one theory about Stein's crusade, that someone here mentioned a few days ago, that might explain why she called for the recount- that Stein believes her vote totals were "hacked" lower. She won only 1.1% of the vote in WI, and probably expected more based on the pre-election polling.
Now my opinion even before the election was that percentages Stein and Johnson were polling would end up being quite a bit higher than they would actually receive in the voting, so I am not surprised that combined they couldn't draw much more than 5%. My assumption was that most of the people saying they would vote for Stein and Johnson would end up either voting for Trump or Clinton, or even more likely not vote at all. However, not everyone agrees with this assumption. The theory, of which Richard Charnin is the biggest promoter, is that some of Stein's votes were changed to Clinton votes. If Stein believes this, then the only way to get at it is to call for a hand-recount, but to do that she needs the money and the only way to get the money for any recount anywhere is to target states that Trump won- no one will fund a recount of, lets say California or New Hampshire for example.
I don't there's any rational justification for a recount. Nate Silver does. But Nate Silver is honest enough to point out its problems:
...when you’re examining results in thousands of precincts, it’s easy to detect results that look like funny business even when they have a perfectly innocent explanation. If hundreds of researchers are performing hundreds of statistical tests on hundreds of results, there are going to be a lot of false positives, including some that researchers claim have an extraordinarily high degree of statistical significance. (See also: our reporting on “p-hacking” and the scourge of false positives in the scientific community.) It’s also easy to uncover actual but isolated irregularities, such as malfunctioning voting machines, which nonetheless aren’t part of a broader conspiracy to rig the results.
It’s easy for smart people to be deceived by these claims, especially if they’re motivated to see a particular result. And it’s easy for journalists to spread misinformation by highlighting the claims, without providing sufficient scrutiny of them.
When I posted this to Facebook, the general feedback I got from my liberal friends varied from "that's interesting, but ..." to "I don't care. I want a recount."
The latter is from the hard-core Clinton supporters. Stein has gamed them effortlessly.
Walker is going to be Secretary of Dairy Cows.
Where do I know that Jill Stein picture from?
Life moves pretty fast. If you don't stop and look around once in a while, you could miss it.
I did not know that "more than" means the same thing as "other than."
According to Mark Belling, Jill Stein gets more cash than she spent on her campaign across the entire country plus a list of gullibles with cash for future Green Party efforts.
Everyone seems sure than the General Accounting Board will get this Wisconsin recount done in time although no recount this large has ever been done in time remaining. If it isn't finished and we lose our electoral college votes then Jill Stein with the GAB will have disenfranchised the whole state of Wisconsin. And I think there should be a civil rights lawsuit over that - voter suppression or conspiring to deprive others of exercising their civil rights or whatever. Naming Jill Stein and all her contributors. And if someday the Russians find and publish Clinton-Stein e-mails, then the Clintons should be added onto the lawsuit.
Headline: Trump picks Chaos for Transportatoon Secretary.
This looks to me like an effort by Hillary Clinton's campaign, with Jill Stein and the Green Party agreeing to act as the front in return for a kickback. No hard evidence, but for Clinton's sudden decision to participate in the recount to "protect" her interests once Jill Stein started the process. Have any journalists looked at this angle?
Lets not pretend that had 2/3 of those voting for Stein in WI had voted for Hillary we would not be recounting in WI, maybe not in other states either. In fact the big story would be how much of a threat to democracy Trump is by not accepting the results.
Thanks Jill!
A "pithy" tweet that seems too extreme if you assume that's all Walker has to say? How Trump-like.
And it's not like his point and yours aren't complimentary.
Al Gore tried to steal the election in 2000. Why not try the same on every election?
From the viewpoint of a blogger, every tweet is insufficiently nuanced.
"Headline: Trump picks Chaos for Transportatoon Secretary."
I assume that was a typo, but Chaos sounds a lot better than Chao.
"How is that road building project going, Secretary Chaos?"
"Chaos SMASH! We just blew it up...for fun!"
Ron Fornier thinks it's Hillary's way of letting Clinton Foundation donors know that the Clinton are not dead yet.
$END Mooney!! $$$$$$$
As much as this recount bullshit is going to help Trump and the Republicans, I may have to make a large donation to Stein's scam!
Yesterday, the news coverage evolved from a claim that "Stein has said she raised $5 Million mostly from small donations" to this statement of fact that "Stein has raised $5 Million almost all from small donations".
My point is the MSM has adopted a possible "fake news" story without any proof that Stein's claim re small donors is true.
"...the recount effort is also a scheme to get good publicity for the Green Party and to hurt Donald Trump by keeping resistance to the outcome of the election alive."
Mebbe so... but when Stein starts out saying she only needs $1.5M for the recount and then repeatedly keeps upping the amount she 'needs' as the $ keep rolling in, it's MOSTLY all about the fundraising.
Stein said she needed $2 million, then $5 million, and now $7 million to do recounts. Meanwhile, PA announced that before thanksgiving they had missed the deadline to file for a recount.
I'm not sure the legal mechanism here, but as far as I can tell this is fraudulent.
Will be waiting for outcome of this hearing coming up in Madison, Dane County, at 4:30PM today, re: hand count of ballots in Wisconsin. The conventional wisdom says that because this is a Madison judge, the ruling will be in Stein's favor. Judge Valerie Bailey-Rihn - just elected this year (unopposed), woman, 54 years old, 25 years with Quarles & Brady law firm. I speculate that she will uphold the decision of the Wisconsin Elections Commission, and local clerks will be able to do the recounts in the manner that they decide.
Jill Stein vs. Wisconsin Elections Commission et al
Dane County Case Number 2016CV003060
Note: C-CAP now requires a Captcha to get in to the site - so if the link may not take you directly to the case.
TreeJoe said...
Stein said she needed $2 million, then $5 million, and now $7 million to do recounts. Meanwhile, PA announced that before thanksgiving they had missed the deadline to file for a recount.
I'm not sure the legal mechanism here, but as far as I can tell this is fraudulent.
11/29/16, 12:51 PM
No, not at all. It all depends on what your definition of "recount" is. Gill plans to use the money to hire ACORN to canvas the affected states door-to-door asking everyone how they voted. If the totals don't match FRAUD!
Blogger coupe said...
"7 million dollars would pay for 7 miles of quality road construction."
Not even close.
I don't understand why Clinton didn't do more to distance herself from Stein and why Trump paid any attention at all. Shows Clinton's indecisiveness and Trump's instability.
Jill Stein is the woman who said the dangers of a Clinton presidency were “more immediate and intense” than Trump’s, and called Clinton’s foreign policy “a mushroom cloud waiting to happen.” So either Stein has a newfound taste for Armageddon or her recount is a cynical ploy.
Just add RT=/=Endorse on your Twitter page. Problem: Solved.
I am not so sure that Clinton is really leaning into this, but conspiracy theories abound. Remembering the WI recall efforts, and the disappointment that Obama did not jump in - I got the impression the Democrats (national) did not want to get on that crazy train, that they wanted the damage contained to Wisconsin. Clinton's representative stated that they did not anticipate the results changing. I suspect the same thing here - trying to be close enough that things don't go too far off the rails.
Another theory I have is that by paying lip service to this, the Democrats stand a chance of keeping these people close to their plantation. The last thing the Democrats need is their own version of the "Tea Party" forming and causing all manner of grief down ticket over the next few years.
We should give Stein a break. She's in mourning for her beloved Fidel.
I think a fundraising scheme for the Green Party (don't see how this move garners good publicity) is Stein's prime motivation. But I think the people who are behind it and providing the bulk of the funds have other motivations, the main one being to discredit a Trump presidency.
I don't think retweeting is necessarily an endorsement. Sometimes it's a "can you believe this shit" kind of thing. The person doing the retweeting can explain at her option.
Lets not pretend that had 2/3 of those voting for Stein in WI had voted for Hillary we would not be recounting in WI, maybe not in other states either. In fact the big story would be how much of a threat to democracy Trump is by not accepting the results.
The DNC sacrificed the party on the altar of Hillary's personal sense of entitlement. If anybody is to thank for this state of affairs, it's she herself, and her Hubris.
I agree that a retweet without condemnation 'feels' like an endorsement. I realize it isn't. But if someone is unfamiliar with a person's perspective on a particular matter, they could be forgiven for assuming a retweet was an endorsement.
Jill Stein: the twit that keeps on giving.
If it's nothing to worry about, why is Trump so scared?
I believe that Stein has to come up with 3+ million dollars by this afternoon, or the recount will be called off.
"Lets not pretend that had 2/3 of those voting for Stein in WI had voted for Hillary we would not be recounting in WI, maybe not in other states either. In fact the big story would be how much of a threat to democracy Trump is by not accepting the results."
To anguished Clinton voters (over Stein) I say the same thing I said to anguished Gore voters (over Nader)--the third party candidate did not cause your candidate's defeat. Their voters knew full well that voting third party could lead to Trump's (or Bush's) election, and they chose to do so anyway, and if Stein wasn't on the ticket they would have voted for someone else who wasn't Hillary (or left that part of the ballot blank, as many did). They knew and chose not to support Hillary anyway. It may be hard to understand that as a Hillary supporter--surely Hillary is the lesser of two evils!--but the third party voters simply don't agree, and chose neither. If anyone is to blame for Hillary's loss, it's Hillary. She simply didn't get the votes she needed where she needed them.
Let's pretend crooked Hillary wasn't a crook and more Democrats wanted to vote for her.
@ Unknown If it's nothing to worry about, why is Trump so scared?
He isn't scared.
Blogger Unknown said...
If it's nothing to worry about, why is Trump so scared?
Because he is scared to death of being thrown into the election recount briar patch. I heard he is so scared, he is taking medication to calm his nerves. He is calling everyone he knows and pleading, "Please don't throw me into the election recount briar patch! Puleeze!"
He knows how terrible it turned out for Scott Walker and Wisconsin and worries about similar results.
Here is what Marc Elias (Clinton's lawyer) has to say:
Because we had not uncovered any actionable evidence of hacking or outside attempts to alter the voting technology, we had not planned to exercise this option ourselves, but now that a recount has been initiated in Wisconsin, we intend to participate in order to ensure the process proceeds in a manner that is fair to all sides.
We do so fully aware that the number of votes separating Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton in the closest of these states — Michigan — well exceeds the largest margin ever overcome in a recount.
we feel it is important, on principle, to ensure our campaign is legally represented in any court proceedings and represented on the ground in order to monitor the recount process itself.
Listening and Responding To Calls for an Audit and Recount
I believe Hillary is joining in because she knows how much vote fraud went on in inner city areas. She needs her lawyers in there to counter it, and she needs the appearance of cooperation, which was likely focus grouped. If Stein is afraid of hacking, then why recount PA, which has paper ballots. Lots of fraudulent ones in Philly for sure, but they cannot be hacked.
If I were Trump I would make it be known that any illegal coming forward with credible evidence of illegals being assisted and encouraged to vote by Democrats would be given legal status.
"Jim Berg & I out hunting"? I knew your governor wasn't a college grad, but I didn't know he was this dumb.
@ Gretchen: and she needs the appearance of cooperation, which was likely focus grouped
This was the end of the link from my 2:08 post:
The campaign is grateful to all those who have expended time and effort to investigate various claims of abnormalities and irregularities. While that effort has not, in our view, resulted in evidence of manipulation of results, now that a recount is underway, we believe we have an obligation to the more than 64 million Americans who cast ballots for Hillary Clinton to participate in ongoing proceedings to ensure that an accurate vote count will be reported.
Doesn't sound like he is saying the "accurate vote" is going to change the end result.
campy, can you explicate?
Possibly you assume the un-written part is an introductory "here are", in which case "Jim Berg and I" is grammatically correct. Maybe you think...I dunno what you think. Tough work here. You might just be a douchebag.
CNN was in Florence Wisconsin to discuss the recount with the people of the town.
All I could think of is why and how did CNN pick Florence, WI? The city is over 100 miles from Green Bay-which I also found out last night. So pretty much in the middle of nowhere.
I never heard of Florence and had to find it on the map. Population 2,000 near the border of the UP of Michigan. FYI-Florence County has a population of a little over 4,000-second least populous county in Wisconsin.
And of course everyone CNN spoke to in Florence were hideous and gigantic-wearing Packer jerseys-XXXL
Simple concept:
In Wisconsin, Trump got 1.4 Million votes. Jill Stein got 30,000 votes (about 1.1%)
That means, 99% of Wisconsin did not vote for Jill Stein.
That means a recount, will literally be counting 2.5 Million votes who rejected Jill Stein.
Is Dr. Stein hoping to bump up her vote totals to 1.2%?
Since Dr. Stein cannot win, and was soundly rejected at the polls, she must have some other motive for forcing Wisconsin to undertake this idle pointless exercise, right?
Pray tell, what possibly could it be?
Titus, supposedly Florence County had the highest % for Trump - 71.6% (1897 votes for Trump - 666 for Clinton - 17 for Stein).
campy, can you explicate?
Imagine Jim Berg is not in the photo. What would the tweet say? "I out hunting"?
You might just be a douchebag.
Possibly. Possibly not.
Breaking: Apparently, there are officials in Wisconsin who have difficulty with simple arithmetic.
"Also on Tuesday, Stein's campaign is required to submit $3.5 million to cover the costs of the recount, a figure based on estimates provided to the state Elections Commission by county clerks. The actual projected cost is $3.9 million, but the cost given to Stein's campaign was $400,000 short of that due to an adding error."
$400,000 here... $400,000 there...
"...666 for Clinton..."
Hmm. Where have I seen that number before?
Clinton is not doing any favors for the local Dems by shitting on all those paid and volunteers who work the polls. They do their best as a public service, but hey, let's tell them they are incompetent. That should help.
Checking out the Dane County Judge that is deciding the issue of doing hand count.
Contributor to Mary Burke (D- Gov. 2014); Brett Hulsey (D - Gov. 2014); Tom Barrett (D- Gov. 2012 Recall); Susan Happ (D - Attorney General). Her husband: Feingold, Kloppenburg, Burke, Barrett, Falk (D- Governor recall 2012), Shelley Moore (D - Senate recall 2012).
On the upside, does not look they are any good at picking winners. On the downside, she is going to decide how the recount proceeds.
Blogger campy said...
campy, can you explicate?
Imagine Jim Berg is not in the photo. What would the tweet say? "I out hunting"?
Wouldn't it just say, "out hunting". Or would you prefer it said, "Me out hunting"?
Clinton is not doing any favors for the local Dems by shitting on all those paid and volunteers who work the polls.
In my city, courthouse employees have been alerted that they will be expected to not use their parking lots (remote lot is several blocks away) due to the expectation that there will be a lot of officials, counters, and media there. Of course, attorneys and clients making court appearances will be in for a rude surprise when they can't get near the courthouse for their court appearances.
This is the kind of stuff that will work to Trump's advantage - just like it did for Scott Walker.
"Blogger campy said...
campy, can you explicate?
Imagine Jim Berg is not in the photo. What would the tweet say? "I out hunting"?"
LMAO! Good God, it's a freakin' tweet! Campy, I'm not usually an ad hominem kind of guy, but you're raising (or is it lowering?) partisan douchebaggery to a whole new level of moronic.
Maybe campy is upset that it's not a complete sentence and since it's not a complete sentence you can't tell if it's the subject or object?
He should never read twitter. Incomplete sentences. Totally.
Is today the Wisconsin deadline for delivering the check for the recount?
Actually, there is something to this. If these 3 states do not have enough time to do the recount and then certify the electors, then their EVs will not be counted when the official count is done. Which is in early December, I believe. Then Trump loses all these EVs from the 3 states, and Hillary has the majority of votes cast. So she becomes President.
Remember, the winning candidate is the one with a MAJORITY of the EVs cast, NOT 270.
It only goes to the House when no candidate has a majority.
Talk about starting a civil war! I sure as Hell will buy a gun if this is what happens. And lots of ammo, too.
Don't quit your day job, Jon.
December 13 is the day when states are supposed to certify, and EC ballots due December 19th.
Fabi - I can't quit my day job - I'm retired.
Jon, Trump has 302 electoral votes, Hillary has 232. If you subtract WI (10), MI (16), PA (20) electoral votes from Trump's totals, he'd still have 256 electoral votes, or 24 electoral votes more than Clinton.
Also, Jon, everyone should have at least one gun, and lots of ammo.
I think Jill and Hill are going to split the money. If the total take so far is 7 mil 3.5 isn't near enough to keep the Clintons in beer and skittles but maybe they can find enough dummies to keep the cash coming until Chelsea has some clout.
"campy said...
"Jim Berg & I out hunting"? I knew your governor wasn't a college grad, but I didn't know he was this dumb."
Ask all the teachers, and state workers, and UW employees, and union presidents, and George Soros, and Tom Barrett, and Mary Burke, and Wis Dems how stupid he is.
Not as stupid as you.
Sexy!
Allen S - that's what I get for being 50+ years out of MIT - I can't do math anymore. Thanks, I feel a lot better now.
“As the post-election day hangover wears off, an examination of the mechanics behind the Clinton’s get out the vote efforts ― reaching out to Clinton voters in key states at the door, on the phone or by text messages ― reveals evidence of what appears to be a pretty shocking truth. Clinton volunteers were inadvertently turning out Trump voters. Possibly in significant numbers.”
Hillary probably handed Trump Wisconsin by taking old Democrat constituencies for granted and dragged them to the polls by the ear.
Allen S,
Those votes would then go to Hillary.
exhelodrvr1, I was responding to Jon, when he said that those electoral votes would be voided, not that the vote count would go to Hillary and with them the electoral votes.
That "hunting tweet" demonstrates expert-level skill for annoying hard lefties.
Shocked that a Dane Cty judge denied Steins request for a hand recount.
Whats happening in Madison that a noncon did not get their way in court?
I hate, hate hunting and hunters with every fiber of my being. I love animals. I would outlaw hunting, and trapping if I could. I object to hunting for food, fun, or for any other reason. It is cruel, barbaric and inhuman. Do I make myself clear?
320Busdriver - awesome news - another wonderful Tuesday night. Maybe Stein will ask for her $3.9 Million back & put this clown show to rest.
I love hunting -- especially for bunny rabbits.
alan markus said...
... put this clown show to rest.
"Go on, squeeze the wheeze, many people like to."
I just visited The New Yorker's timeline and they seem to be working on the same model: Vent and capitalize on grief, hopelessness and anger at political outcomes, blame 'enemies'
When you sacralize ideals and ideology, all your hopes are in the basket of political power and change...
If you're Jill Stein of the Cabbage Party, you need to take that basket to market.
Don't go soixante retard.
This is just post election bonuses being paid to Clinton lawyers and operatives who had expected nice government jobs had Hillary won. Jill is just fronting it. The left should keep this shit up, it will guarantee four more years for Trump or least a Republican scorched earth policy for the first four.
Biff said...
"That "hunting tweet" demonstrates expert-level skill for annoying hard lefties."
The first thing I thought of, "Did they get their deer?"
The other guy looks like Jabba The Hut in sunglasses.
"That "hunting tweet" demonstrates expert-level skill for annoying hard lefties."
It's a cultural signal. In many areas (urban or close in suburbs) a person who actually hunts is a rare find, but in much of the country it's an ingrained part of the culture, even for non-hunters--so a mention of hunting is a way of saying "I'm one of you" sort of like "great food at that church supper". A different cultural signal might be "see you at the Mapplethorpe exhibit!" or "boycott Shell Oil!"
"I hate, hate hunting and hunters with every fiber of my being. I love animals. I would outlaw hunting, and trapping if I could. I object to hunting for food, fun, or for any other reason. It is cruel, barbaric and inhuman. Do I make myself clear?"
You certainly make yourself clear. Pretty cruel indeed.
You also make it clear that you know nothing of game management. Or the resulting mass starvation and death by disease if, in today's world, hunting was banned.
I also note you did not self-identify as a vegan. Do you wear leather? If no to either you are just a hypocrite that hires his killing.
Perhaps this just another I FEELZ it so very, very much so I must be right.
And, FWIW,I am not a hunter. But I did work with biologists over a 30+ year career. (Gawd I hate it when lefties say they are the party of science. What a crock of crap.)
Trumpit said...
I hate, hate hunting and hunters with every fiber of my being. I love animals. I would outlaw hunting, and trapping if I could. I object to hunting for food, fun, or for any other reason. It is cruel, barbaric and inhuman. Do I make myself clear?
11/29/16, 10:04 PM
My cousin got a buck in Northern Wisconsin last week and I will think of you and all the braindead bunny huggers when I down my delicious Bambi steak. Your idiotic hatred will go well with lovely medium rare venison (served with a nice Pinot Noir) and your tears will help favor the mashed potatoes and grilled root veggies I will serve on the side. Thank you for enabling me to relish my that tasty deer meat all the more.
Incidentally, my cousin was a Bernie voter. In Wisconsin, even leftists like shooting Bambi's mom.
Trump is not scared. He's pissed off. Not a smart move by the Clinton's. Hilary got a "get out of jail free" card and may have just burned it. Hey, maybe Bill is behind this. If he keeps bugging Trump, maybe Trump will appoint a special prosecutor and send Hillary to jail. She won't be hanging around the house then.
Hey, if all these people are really so concerned with the integrity of the vote, then they would be more than willing to see how many illegal aliens voted in CA, right? How many ex-felons in VA? Nah. Won't happen. That would require actual moral and ethical standards on their part.
BTW, Trumpit, even the greenest organic farmer has to kill many animals to provide you with kale and sprouts. If he didn't, he wouldn't have a crop. So the next time you sit down to your dour vegetarian feast, give a thought to the many foxes, voles, deer, rabbits,chipmunks, field mice, groundhogs and insects who died so you can live.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा