It was close,byes, and MSM certainly were narrating it as though Trump had no chance, but Holiday did still win.
The electorial college(the government not the people) overrid the people's vote and chose Trump so I'm not understanding how the fraud was defeated and that that is how Trump became President.
I understand the electorial college just fine. The government chooses the president. The people do not. Shortly after this country was founded they scrapped the idea that the president would be chosen by the people/popular vote, but they have almost always voted the same.
By break tradition I mean that they have almost always voted along with the popular vote. There have been four occasions including the 2016 election when they have not voted the same, soni said they broke tradition meaning they voted differently.
My point still stands in that it does not make sense that Q stopped the fraud in 2016!if hilary received more votes, but it was the govt that voted for Trump.
Hilary actually got more votes than Trump if you remember. It was the electorial college that broke tradition and voted trump in as president.
So I don't see how Q stopped any dominion fraud, that does not really make sense.
He would probably be more supportive of Trump if Trump wasn't pushing the vaccine and calling himself the father of the vaccine. This guy has been the one guy fighting pharmaceutical companies over VACCINE SAFETY for years, the Trump comes along and takes credit for the deep states agenda to push the most experimental drugs on the market through with no saftey data placing us all dead in the middle of what he is calling the apocalypse. You have to look at it from his perspective.
I was quietly banned from there months ago. I tried not to sound like I was against them, and just put everything I could in a different life. I even told a couple that they should watch what they were saying because that kind of dangerous careless talk might encourage hesitancy in order to place emphasis on what they were saying. People were talking about passing out driving home and shit like that
Well, not that this country was settled by my ancestors as you put it, but white people's ancestral lands are in europe, not north America. That's the difference between asian people born in Asia, and African people born in Africa as you put it. When the settlers got here there was already people living here. That's one of the things they hold against white american people. Other people had already been settled here for thousands of years when the whites began to come here. So when you are asking the question about asians born in asiaa, africans born in Africa you might have also said swedes born in sweden for example. The idea that white americans have a system of racism is also that America was founded on racism because white people settled where non whites had already been settled, but they acted like no one was already here.
White europeans are the ancestors you're talking about, they were from Europe which was their homeland asians from n Asia are in their home land, Africans born in Africa are in their homeland Swedes born in Sweden are in their homeland.
White people being in North America is like arabs in Europe.
Sorcery and medicine have been intertwined through most of human history until science.
Even with science some of the mentality has hung over. The average person getting vaccinated in the past few decades thinks of it as a marvel of the modern world, but at the same time very naively as though it was some magic potion to wardn off disease with no side effects. I have been making the comparison of sorcery and vaccines for years.
Also psychiatry is very much like modern day sorcery; changing the structure of mind, personality and personhood with potions.
The more I think about it, it is likey a pretty accurate poll. If you just read the comments in this thread, (a thread in a "right wing extremist" pro republican forum) and see how many people here alone identify as socially liberal then it gives some insight into what you might expect in the public at large. I would expect the public at large would have alot more people identifying as socially liberal than GAW does but apparently there are alot of us here too.
Libertarians is a political part with characteristics of both left wing and right wing. in other words liberal and conservative characteristics. So it is natural that when person who is socially liberal briefly describes their views and professes to not be a democrat you might see them as libertarian but that does not mean that they are not a liberal. It just means that because they are not typical they don't fall into onen of your boxes.
Most people thought of Jordan Peterson as a right wing conservative because he was anti far left and did not fit into one of their boxes but he is definitely a liberal.
People who really think for themselves are often really difficult to fit into generic boxes.
I'm also socially liberal, but have never seen any reason to back the democrats. Right now I find myself identifying more with conservatives and Republicans on many political issues due to the extremities that the left has gone.
Although I could not identify with George Bush Jr, even when he had the right supporting him, the NWO and NWO wars I still did not identify with the democrat party.
I'm not easily swayed and I don't confuse my social views with political views
Politically I think we should have very little government. I believe in human rights and equality so I believe in autonomy, liberty and freedom not government/laws in everybody's buissness.
It says 'socially liberal', it does not say politically liberal, or democrat.
Each of those terms are different things.
I am socially liberal but would never back the democrat party in anyway and never would have . I am also more old fashioned than many conservatives in my age group (46).
You can be socially liberal, but not be a leftist, or a democrat. You can be a conservative but vote democrat. You can be a democrat, but not actually be a real liberal, I. Fact Id say there are as many fake liberal democrats as there are are fake conservative Republicans.
A person who is actually liberal would not be a racist who seeks to stratify society.
The founding fathers would have been called liberals in today's terms, just like the first settlers who came here on the Mayflower would have been called conservatives using today's terms
Just like there are RINOs, there are LINOs.
Many people who are liberal have had their minds hijacked by the democrat party because the democrat party speaks of liberal ideals in the same way the RINOs hijacked the conservative mind when republican voters feverishly backed George Bush Jr when he did his part to usher in the NWO and started a bunch of wars for them..
Get a life, do you not remember that that is what happened??? Hilary received a win as far as the popular vote, but the popular vote doesn't matter.
Shortly after the US was founded they scrapped the idea that the people would choose the president and decided that the president would be chosen by the govt. That is when they came up with the electorial college.
Trump's win was only the 4th time in history that the electorial college did not choose who the people chose.
Get fucked your self!!!
LMAO