Ohio 12th Congressional District

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by the_real_Barleycorn

A win is a win! Take note of the candidates. A young photogenic democrat who ran as a moderate. Yes, moderate. He said he would not Pelosi as speaker. His opponent? A rather odd looking, tired man who was just another politician trying to move up. Trump came around but Trump wasn't running.

Interesting comments and I agree totally.

[bamscram]

Originally Posted by the_real_Barleycorn

A win is a win! Take note of the candidates. A young photogenic democrat who ran as a moderate. Yes, moderate. He said he would not Pelosi as speaker. His opponent? A rather odd looking, tired man who was just another politician trying to move up. Trump came around but Trump wasn't running.

In a highly conservative district that Trump carried handily it should have been a slam dunk not a tossup.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

You ARE aware that the final report hasn’t been submitted for that special election, aren’t you, IBIdiot? Or are you basing your entire “reputation” on that one story from WaPo?

I guess the latter, because you’ve been a word-turd for several days now based on that and that alone.

Your lying-ass is mendaciously ignoring the $5 million that Soros invested to block voter ID laws, you Mussulman-luvin, Hitler worshipping, lying, hypocritical, racist, cum-gobbling golem fucktard, HDDB, DEM.

[Bill Duwall]

Soros is funding all these pro-kalergi one world liberal government assholes.

[dilbert firestorm]

Originally Posted by garhkal

First i heard of that... Got any links showing it?

It should be on the FEC website. should be easy enough to get a list. the tricky part is identifying which has "Soros hands" on it.

[garhkal]

Originally Posted by bamscram

In a highly conservative district that Trump carried handily it should have been a slam dunk not a tossup.

Part of it i think is down to the media's poor showing on the immigration front, making it seem trump and our laws are so heartless..

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by bamscram

In a highly conservative district that Trump carried handily it should have been a slam dunk not a tossup.

But of course you know little about special elections, among other topics, so your opinion is worthless.

On the other hand using your "assessment" of Trump, along with a lot of other retarded anti/never Trumpers, his endorsement should have sounded the death knell of the candidate he endorsed. But it didn't, and actually pushed him ahead in the race.

So much for your shallow thought process.

November is not to far away.

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Some people's thoughts on the upcoming November elections.

https://www.vox.com/2018/8/10/176705...tion-blue-wave

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

Some people's thoughts on the upcoming November elections.

10-20-2016, 08:03 AM #21
SpeedRacerXXX


This election is OVER. Republicans should start focusing on 2020. Unless a bomb hits between now and November 8th there is no way Trump can overcome the lead that Clinton has in the polls. For those of you who are still not believing the polls . . . we'll see in a handful of days how accurate they are.

Not much has changed.

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

Not much has changed.

One was MY opinion. The article cited contains several other people's opinions.

[friendly fred]

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

Get over yourself BUTTPLUG. The D wasn’t supposed to scratch. If Twitler had stayed away, he might have gotten his ass whipped.

We’ll see if the Rs hold that seat in November. It’s another district in serious play now.

And ... DID YOU JUST LINK TO ALEX JONES?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAAAAA!!!! !

You are right. You people are eventually going to triumph and run the country. Unfortunately, you people also run Chicago, which is a complete fucked up mess because of liberalism and its fellow traveler, the diversity industry which creates more fiction and problems than the few positives it creates.

You people are going to make the US more fucked up than it is now.

You will likely shut down websites like this, because liberals now hate free speech and commercial sexual activity.

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by friendly fred

You will likely shut down websites like this, because liberals now hate free speech and commercial sexual activity.

Now that's funny. You do remember that eccie was recently shut down and liberals had absolutely nothing to do with it.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...-idUSKCN1HD2QP

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

Now that's funny. You do remember that eccie was recently shut down and liberals had absolutely nothing to do with it.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...-idUSKCN1HD2QP

Is this another one of your "opinions"?

From your article that you cite as "authority" it seems:

the California and Texas attorneys general had helped shut down the website.

Does California have more than one "attorney general"?

He's not only "liberal," he's a nut-case!

And I didn't see "Eccie" mentioned in your article. I'll look again!

Yep, looked again! No mention of "Eccie"! Since you are much better acquainted with the article (since you cited it as authority), perhaps you can copy and paste the reference to Eccie in the article.

In the meantime I will do a little research to see just how many LIBERALS voted for the Federal statute that authorized the actions taken against BACKPAGE! Speaking of being "FUNNY"! You're sadly hilarious.

Is it remotely possible that the "powers to be" with respect to Eccie preemptively shut down their own board to avoid legal action and cranked up again with some tweaking to avoid the focus of the statutory authority and legal actions being taken by the LIBERALS who are seeking to protect the alleged female victims who are being forced to receive money in exchange for providing males (and I presume other females) with their company?

There is some authority to support the "LIBERAL" perspective ...

http://humantraffickingsearch.org/20...1aqwshfpe1t1o/

Hillary Clinton
Hillary Clinton has long been an anti-trafficking advocate. As the First Lady, Clinton championed the cause on an international platform and supported the passage of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act domestically. In her role as Secretary of State, she oversaw 170 anti-trafficking programs in 70 countries, and shed light on trafficking on the domestic front by incorporating the U.S. for the first time in the 2010 Trafficking in Persons (TIP) report. She furthermore launched humanrights.gov, which works to hold governments accountable regarding various human rights abuses, including trafficking in persons. Clinton has written several op-eds on human trafficking that have had international acclaim.

If elected President, she has promised to “make this issue a moral and strategic priority.” In an article published on her website entitled, “Here’s How I Plan to End Modern Slavery,” Clinton defines her strategy in three goals: put survivors at the center; strengthen our government’s response and increase our resources; and launch a global alliance.

That is if one believes HillariousNoMore is a "LIBERAL"!

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

Is this another one of your "opinions"?

From your article that you cite as "authority" it seems:



Does California have more than one "attorney general"?

He's not only "liberal," he's a nut-case!

And I didn't see "Eccie" mentioned in your article. I'll look again!

Yep, looked again! No mention of "Eccie"! Since you are much better acquainted with the article (since you cited it as authority), perhaps you can copy and paste the reference to Eccie in the article.

In the meantime I will do a little research to see just how many LIBERALS voted for the Federal statute that authorized the actions taken against BACKPAGE! Speaking of being "FUNNY"! You're sadly hilarious.

Is it remotely possible that the "powers to be" with respect to Eccie preemptively shut down their own board to avoid legal action and cranked up again with some tweaking to avoid the focus of the statutory authority and legal actions being taken by the LIBERALS who are seeking to protect the alleged female victims who are being forced to receive money in exchange for providing males (and I presume other females) with their company?

There is some authority to support the "LIBERAL" perspective ...

http://humantraffickingsearch.org/20...1aqwshfpe1t1o/



That is if one believes HillariousNoMore is a "LIBERAL"!

Certainly it was my opinion, just as Fred's comments were his opinions.

ECCIE shut down itself before they were forced to do it, as Backpage was. Obviously the shut down of Backpage influenced ECCIE. If you believe otherwise, tell us.

Texas AG is Republican. The Justice Department is headed by Jeff Sessions, a Republican. California AG is a Democrat. So 2 of the 3 who seem to be held accountable for the shut down of Backpage in the article were Republican.

You have presented YOUR opinions in your post. Fine. Go argue with someone who cares.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

.. You do remember that eccie was recently shut down and liberals had absolutely nothing to do with it.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...-idUSKCN1HD2QP

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

Certainly it was my opinion, just as Fred's comments were his opinions.

ECCIE shut down itself before they were forced to do it, as Backpage was. Obviously the shut down of Backpage influenced ECCIE. If you believe otherwise, tell us.

You're full of shit! You do realize it don't you?

I offered no opinion on why either one was shut down.

You are the idiot who said

.."liberals had absolutely nothing to do with it."

It's noteworthy that you pretend to know the political inclinations of the decision-makers of Eccie, as well! Not to mention pretending to read their minds and explain why they decided to do one thing or another.

Like I said: You're an idiot! And I'm not "arguing" with you at all!

You are NOTHING with whom to "argue"! You're an idiot! A NOTHING!