***Official Political Discussion Thread***

Which Dems are you talking about?

Because the party told her to retire in 2018. She refused. She ran again.

And she blew out the competition in the primary.

She should have resigned. But voters don't take their chances to fix this situation too.

And here we are again. ****ed.

Dozen of judges will not get appointed. With the Dem a near lock to lose the Senate next year. With maybe no path to get it back for a while.

I just hope a Supreme Court Justice seat doesn't open up.

Smh
The ones who refuse to step aside to allow the party to progress.

I don't disagree with you at all. If anything, what you posted here is yet another example of Dem (or should I say Liberal) figures placing themselves and their personal ambitions above the good of their side of the political spectrum.

It IS very annoying to say the least.
 
“They got money for poors but can’t feed the wars.”

“Instead of a war on poverty, they got a war on drugs so the police can bother me (as they should).”

“Since a man helped make one, he’s got every right to tell a women when and where to create one.”

“LA would be much better without Mexicans”

“They say the blacker the berry, the more inferior the juice.”

“Brenda’s got a baby and she BETTER bring it to term”

 


The first 5 or so minutes of the presentation present a brilliant reframing of skilled migration and how we talk about it.
 

Only in Murica.
Couldn't make decisions for herself, but certainly could decide for 300 million people.
f her. Ruth Ginsburg too while at it...
Can hardly wipe ur own buttocks but wanna push thru knowing fully well your sudden passing could potentially cede influence to the other side...
f em, wit a devil d. Whatever that is...
 
I probably shouldn’t have laughed so hard at this :lol: :smh:
74111930-80B5-4B70-AF19-31274B2D8B42.jpeg
 
Back
Top Bottom