• "Spreading the ideas of freedom loving people on matters regarding high finance, politics, constructionist Constitution, and mental masturbation of all types"

The Dems are in trouble

the_shootist

Midas Member
Midas Member
Midas Supporter
Joined
May 31, 2015
Messages
33,309
Likes
43,970

Uglytruth

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 6, 2011
Messages
6,882
Likes
10,631
At an event today talking with a guy from CA. Hates it! Loves the midwest. NOTHING good to say about any politicans. Does not like Trump's talk but likes his actions. Wants to move out to get away from homeless and taxes.
 

newmisty

Splodey-Headed
Midas Member
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
25,237
Likes
35,668
Location
Qmerica
At an event today talking with a guy from CA. Hates it! Loves the midwest. NOTHING good to say about any politicans. Does not like Trump's talk but likes his actions. Wants to move out to get away from homeless and taxes.
Ya mean the guy doesn't like dodging dregs with needles hanging out of their arms and human feces in the streets!? :surrender:
 

Uglytruth

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 6, 2011
Messages
6,882
Likes
10,631
He mentioned state funded "wet houses" that are safe spaces for addicts to go shoot up. Said a lot of homeless are crazy. Pissed & moaned about illegals, shittign on streets, causing problems with businesses etc........

Oh yea & nancy pieceofshit is connected to CA govonor...... Gavin Newsom's aunt was married to Ron Pelosi, the brother-in-law of Speaker of the United States House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi Thefts of a feather flock together.........
 

SongSungAU

Midas Member
Midas Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2010
Messages
6,737
Likes
10,650
OR190727.jpg
 

edsl48

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
2,441
Likes
4,558
After Mueller Debacle, Where Do Democrats Go?

The Democrats who were looking to cast Robert Mueller as the star in a TV special, "The Impeachment of Donald Trump," can probably tear up the script. They're gonna be needing a new one.

For six hours Wednesday, as three cable news networks and ABC, CBS and NBC all carried live the hearings of the House Judiciary and Intelligence Committees, the Mueller report was thoroughly trashed.

The special counsel stood by his findings. His investigation was not a "hoax" or "witch hunt," he said. He admitted that he had found no Trump-Russia conspiracy. He denied he exonerated Trump of obstruction of justice.

All this we knew, and all of it we have heard for months.

What was new, what was dramatic, what was compelling was how the House Republicans arrived with their war paint on and ripped Mueller and his investigation to such shreds that viewers were feeling sorry for the special counsel at the end of his six hours of grilling.

The Republicans exposed him as only vaguely conversant with his own report. They revealed that he had probably not written his own statement challenging the depiction of his findings by Attorney General Bill Barr.

Mueller's staff of lawyers, Republicans showed, reads like a donors list for Hillary Clinton. The FBI contingent that started the investigation was a cabal so hateful of Trump that some had to be fired.

Republicans raised questions about the origins of the investigation, tracing it back to early 2016 when Maltese intelligence agent Joseph Mifsud leaked to a staffer of the Trump campaign, George Papadopoulos, that Russia had Clinton's emails. That and subsequent meetings have all the marks of an intel agency set-up.

Repeatedly, Republicans brought up the dossier written by British spy Christopher Steele, who fed Russian-sourced disinformation to Clinton campaign-financed intel firm, Fusion GPS, who passed it on to the FBI, which used it as evidence to justify warrants to spy on Trump's campaign.

To many in the TV audience, this was fresh and startling stuff.

Yet Mueller's response to all such allegations was that they were outside his purview and that other agencies were looking into them.

Wednesday's hearings often proved painful to watch.

Mueller, a 74-year-old decorated Marine veteran of Vietnam and a former director of the FBI, sat mumbling his dissents as one charge after another was fired at him, his associates and his investigation.

For this disaster, the Democrats are alone to blame.

Mueller had wanted to file his report and leave it to the attorney general and Congress to act, or not act, on its contents. His job was done, and he did not want to testify publicly.

Democrats, desperate for impeachment hearings, wanted him to recite for the TV cameras every charge against the president.

What Democrats hoped would be a recital of Trump's sins, Republicans turned into an adversarial proceeding that ended Mueller's public career in a humiliating spectacle lasting a full day.

Where do Democrats go from here?

Their goal from the outset has been to persuade the nation that Trump colluded with Putin's Russia to steal the 2016 election, and that the progressives are the true patriots in seeking to impeach and remove an illegitimate president and prosecute him for acts of treason.

The Republican position is that, for all his flaws and failings, Trump won the 2016 election fairly and squarely. He is our president, and the drive to impeach and remove him is an attempted constitutional coup d'etat by a "deep state" terrified that it cannot win against him in 2020.

The rival narratives are irreconcilable.

The Republican message of Wednesday: Proceed with hearings to impeach and there will be blood on the floor.

Democrats are in a hellish bind.

Should they proceed with hearings on impeachment, they will divide their party, force their presidential candidates to cease talking health care and start talking impeachment, and probably fail.

Impeachment hearings would fire up the Republican base and energize the GOP minority to prepare for combat in a Judiciary Committee where they are already celebrating having eviscerated the prosecution's star witness.

If Democrats vote impeachment in committee, they will have to take it to the House floor, where their moderates, who won in swing districts, will be forced to vote on it, splitting their own bases in the run-up to the 2020 election.

If Democrats lose the impeachment vote on the House floor, it would be a huge setback. But if they vote impeachment in the House, the trial takes place in a Senate run by Mitch McConnell.

Trump would go into the 2020 battle against a Democratic Party that failed to overthrow the president in a radical coup that it attempted because it was afraid to fight it out with the president in a free and fair election.



COPYRIGHT 2019 CREATORS.COM
 

Thecrensh

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Joined
Jun 26, 2013
Messages
6,558
Likes
8,700
After Mueller Debacle, Where Do Democrats Go?

The Democrats who were looking to cast Robert Mueller as the star in a TV special, "The Impeachment of Donald Trump," can probably tear up the script. They're gonna be needing a new one.

For six hours Wednesday, as three cable news networks and ABC, CBS and NBC all carried live the hearings of the House Judiciary and Intelligence Committees, the Mueller report was thoroughly trashed.

The special counsel stood by his findings. His investigation was not a "hoax" or "witch hunt," he said. He admitted that he had found no Trump-Russia conspiracy. He denied he exonerated Trump of obstruction of justice.

All this we knew, and all of it we have heard for months.

What was new, what was dramatic, what was compelling was how the House Republicans arrived with their war paint on and ripped Mueller and his investigation to such shreds that viewers were feeling sorry for the special counsel at the end of his six hours of grilling.

The Republicans exposed him as only vaguely conversant with his own report. They revealed that he had probably not written his own statement challenging the depiction of his findings by Attorney General Bill Barr.

Mueller's staff of lawyers, Republicans showed, reads like a donors list for Hillary Clinton. The FBI contingent that started the investigation was a cabal so hateful of Trump that some had to be fired.

Republicans raised questions about the origins of the investigation, tracing it back to early 2016 when Maltese intelligence agent Joseph Mifsud leaked to a staffer of the Trump campaign, George Papadopoulos, that Russia had Clinton's emails. That and subsequent meetings have all the marks of an intel agency set-up.

Repeatedly, Republicans brought up the dossier written by British spy Christopher Steele, who fed Russian-sourced disinformation to Clinton campaign-financed intel firm, Fusion GPS, who passed it on to the FBI, which used it as evidence to justify warrants to spy on Trump's campaign.

To many in the TV audience, this was fresh and startling stuff.

Yet Mueller's response to all such allegations was that they were outside his purview and that other agencies were looking into them.

Wednesday's hearings often proved painful to watch.

Mueller, a 74-year-old decorated Marine veteran of Vietnam and a former director of the FBI, sat mumbling his dissents as one charge after another was fired at him, his associates and his investigation.

For this disaster, the Democrats are alone to blame.

Mueller had wanted to file his report and leave it to the attorney general and Congress to act, or not act, on its contents. His job was done, and he did not want to testify publicly.

Democrats, desperate for impeachment hearings, wanted him to recite for the TV cameras every charge against the president.

What Democrats hoped would be a recital of Trump's sins, Republicans turned into an adversarial proceeding that ended Mueller's public career in a humiliating spectacle lasting a full day.

Where do Democrats go from here?

Their goal from the outset has been to persuade the nation that Trump colluded with Putin's Russia to steal the 2016 election, and that the progressives are the true patriots in seeking to impeach and remove an illegitimate president and prosecute him for acts of treason.

The Republican position is that, for all his flaws and failings, Trump won the 2016 election fairly and squarely. He is our president, and the drive to impeach and remove him is an attempted constitutional coup d'etat by a "deep state" terrified that it cannot win against him in 2020.

The rival narratives are irreconcilable.

The Republican message of Wednesday: Proceed with hearings to impeach and there will be blood on the floor.

Democrats are in a hellish bind.

Should they proceed with hearings on impeachment, they will divide their party, force their presidential candidates to cease talking health care and start talking impeachment, and probably fail.

Impeachment hearings would fire up the Republican base and energize the GOP minority to prepare for combat in a Judiciary Committee where they are already celebrating having eviscerated the prosecution's star witness.

If Democrats vote impeachment in committee, they will have to take it to the House floor, where their moderates, who won in swing districts, will be forced to vote on it, splitting their own bases in the run-up to the 2020 election.

If Democrats lose the impeachment vote on the House floor, it would be a huge setback. But if they vote impeachment in the House, the trial takes place in a Senate run by Mitch McConnell.

Trump would go into the 2020 battle against a Democratic Party that failed to overthrow the president in a radical coup that it attempted because it was afraid to fight it out with the president in a free and fair election.



COPYRIGHT 2019 CREATORS.COM
The question that I have yet to have answered by anyone is this; IF there is so much evidence against Trump, then why hasn't the entire Dem majority of the House voted for it? If there really is evidence that Trump was a Russian stooge and broke the law then there wouldn't be any on the left and only some on the right who wouldn't vote FOR impeachment.

My take is that they haven't because the evidence isn't there. Mueller's report was a play on words and legal smoke and mirrors...nothing more.
 

Aurumag

Ag mirror of truth Aurum purity of mind
Midas Member
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
9,379
Likes
11,425
Location
State of Jefferson
After Mueller Debacle, Where Do Democrats Go?
...
6 week vacation in Europe for starters.

I am glad to see them leave, and maybe some of them won't return.
 

SongSungAU

Midas Member
Midas Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2010
Messages
6,737
Likes
10,650
TZ190729.jpg
 

the_shootist

Midas Member
Midas Member
Midas Supporter
Joined
May 31, 2015
Messages
33,309
Likes
43,970
The question that I have yet to have answered by anyone is this; IF there is so much evidence against Trump, then why hasn't the entire Dem majority of the House voted for it? If there really is evidence that Trump was a Russian stooge and broke the law then there wouldn't be any on the left and only some on the right who wouldn't vote FOR impeachment.

My take is that they haven't because the evidence isn't there. Mueller's report was a play on words and legal smoke and mirrors...nothing more.
The answer is simple...the entire thing is a dog and pony show based on ZERO logic and only one objective....to deflect, degrade and delay until the next election
 

Mr Paradise

Midas Member
Midas Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Messages
8,514
Likes
9,368
Location
Lake Superior
As long as Trump keeps bashing liberals on Twitter and F-18’s fly over the Super Bowl those conservative Republicans got my vote.





CCC9C476-9EE9-4314-8DEF-C7C776D95797.jpeg
 

the_shootist

Midas Member
Midas Member
Midas Supporter
Joined
May 31, 2015
Messages
33,309
Likes
43,970

ABC123

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 10, 2010
Messages
3,291
Likes
5,943
BREAKING: Biden THROWS Obama Under The BUS

No wonder Obama didn’t endorse Joe for his 2020 run…

Joe Biden said the White House under President Barack Obama, when Biden was vice president, did not do enough to address the concerns of white working-class voters in the Rust Belt.

“A lot of people were left behind,” the 2020 Democratic candidate told the New York Times when discussing the post-recession economic recovery. “In areas where people were hard hit, I don’t think we paid enough attention to their plight.”

Biden, 76, tried chalking up the disillusionment of white former Democratic voters to a messaging problem, saying Obama told him he didn’t want to take “a victory lap [because] we have so much more to do,” despite pleas the White House “explain to people how we got to where we were now and why it happened.”

In August 2016, Biden told The Atlantic one of the chief appeals of Trump was his ability to speak with the average American and the economically disadvantaged .

“I was doing the interview on Morning Joe, and they asked the same question. And I said, ‘Look, the truth is we just haven’t paid enough attention to these people. We haven’t spoken to them.” And everybody went nuts going, ‘Aw Jesus! Hillary is going to think that’s an attack.’

“But I asked my team what did Hillary just say in her speech? She said we’re not paying enough attention — and the phrase I used that really upset them — I said, ‘We’re not showing them enough respect.’ And she also said we’re not showing enough respect.

“The truth is we are not showing enough respect. There is a new breed of Democrat that is represented by our administration, in my view, and the smart guys, the guys and gals who are Harvard, Yale, Penn graduates; the very, very well-informed, well-educated, elites of the party.

“They are the new version, if they don’t watch it, of the limousine liberals when I was coming up in the ’60s. Because at its core there’s a disconnect with some really, really, really smart, good, decent people who are with us and part of the larger Democratic younger elite, the millennial elite who don’t understand the middle class anymore.”

A month later, Clinton made remarks at a New York fundraiser that some came to see as a key factor in her defeat in November. “You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right?” she said.

“The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic, you name it. And unfortunately there are people like that. And he has lifted them up.”

She added that the other half of Trump’s supporters “feel that the government has let them down” and were “desperate for change” in America. “Those are people we have to understand and empathize with as well.”

https://theconservativealliance.org/breaking-biden-throws-obama-under-the-bus/
 

SongSungAU

Midas Member
Midas Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2010
Messages
6,737
Likes
10,650
Wy190731.jpg


KO190731.jpg
 

Aurumag

Ag mirror of truth Aurum purity of mind
Midas Member
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
9,379
Likes
11,425
Location
State of Jefferson
If a circle jerk and a firing squad could merge into one:

That is what the dims have to offer as POTUS candidates.

Just WALK AWAY while there is still time.
 

edsl48

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
2,441
Likes
4,558
From the NY Times no less!!!

NY Times Op-Ed: Democrats Will Lose Cheering On ‘Ambulance-Chasing, Anti-Semitic’ Al Sharpton
Why Are Democrats Defending Al Sharpton?

They’ve handed Trump an easy win and yoked themselves to a genuine bigot.
By Glenn C. Loury
Mr. Loury is a professor of economics at Brown University.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/31/opinion/al-sharpton-trump.html


Donald Trump, the Rev. Al Sharpton and the boxing promoter Don King, in 2005.CreditCreditPeter Kramer/Getty Images
When I first heard that President Trump had gone after the Rev. Al Sharpton — and that Mr. Sharpton had responded in kind — I must admit that I laughed. Are there two New York City hustlers who deserve one another more?
But 48 hours later, I feel differently. That’s thanks to the leading Democratic candidates for president, who have rushed to Mr. Sharpton’s defense, extolling his supposed virtues as a civil-rights paragon while denouncing Mr. Trump’s attack as racist. In doing so, they have, yet again, taken Mr. Trump’s bait, handing him another easy victory while yoking themselves to a genuine bigot.
To read their tweets, you would think Mr. Sharpton was Gandhi-esque. “@TheRevAl has dedicated his life to the fight for justice for all. No amount of racist tweets from the man in the White House will erase that — and we must not let them divide us. I stand with my friend Al Sharpton in calling out these ongoing attacks on people of color,” wrote Elizabeth Warren. Kamala Harris praisedSharpton as a man who has “spent his life fighting for what’s right.” Joe Biden agreed, lauding the reverend as “a champion in the fight for civil rights.”
The problem for Democrats is that Al Sharpton actually is, as Mr. Trump put it on Twitter, “a con man.” And not just a con man: Mr. Sharpton is an ambulance-chasing, anti-Semitic, anti-white race hustler. His history of offensive statements is longer than the current American president’s. And Mr. Sharpton’s worst sin — his blatant incitement to violence during the Crown Heights riots of 1991 — leaves no doubt that he is not a leader, as New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio described him, who has spent his years “pushing for justice in the teachings of Dr. King.”



Consider this very partial list of his offenses:
Mr. Sharpton came onto the national scene in 1987, during what is now known as the Tawana Brawley affair. On Nov. 28 of that year, a 15-year-old black girl was found lying in a garbage bag, smeared with feces, with various racial slurs and epithets written in charcoal on her body. She said that she’d been raped by six white men and that two were law-enforcement officials. Mr. Sharpton relentlessly championed her cause. And yet, after seven months of examining police and medical records, a grand jury found “overwhelming evidence” that Ms. Brawley had fabricated her entire story.
Yet Mr. Sharpton proceeded to accuse the prosecutor, Steven Pagones, of being one of the perpetrators of the alleged abduction and rape. Mr. Sharpton was successfully sued (along with Ms. Brawley’s lawyers, Anthony H. Maddox Jr. and C. Vernon Mason Sr.) for defamation. The jury in this civil action found Mr. Sharpton liable for making seven defamatory statements about Mr. Pagones, whose life fell apart as a result of the entire episode. Mr. Sharpton refused to pay his share of damages, which was later paid by a number of his supporters, and he has refused to apologize.


In August 1991, after an automobile accident involving the motorcade of a Hasidic rabbi accidentally killed a black child, riots broke out in the Crown Heights neighborhood of Brooklyn. Much of the press portrayed it as a kind of cultural clash between the black and Jewish communities, but it was described accurately by the Times columnist, A.M. Rosenthal, as a “pogrom.”Following the death of the boy, Gavin Cato, hundreds of black men took to the streets. Within hours of the accident, 20 young black men surrounded Yankel Rosenbaum, a 29-year-old Australian yeshiva student visiting the United States to conduct research for his doctorate. They stabbed him several times in the back and beat him. He subsequently died of his injuries. The rioting continued for three days, leaving 152 police officers and 38 civilians injured. At least 122 blacks and seven whites were arrested.Amid this unrest, Mr. Sharpton led hundreds of protesters on a march in front of the headquarters of the Chabad-Lubavitch Hasidic movement. During his remarks at Gavin Cato’s funeral, at which there was a banner declaring, “Hitler did not do the job,” Mr. Sharpton let loose with a eulogy blaming “the diamond merchants right here in Crown Heights,” and insisted that “the issue is not anti-Semitism; the issue is apartheid.” He continued: “All we want to say is what Jesus said: If you offend one of these little ones, you got to pay for it. No compromise, no meetings, no kaffeeklatsch, no skinnin’ and grinnin’. Pay for your deeds.”





Four years later, Mr. Sharpton incited violence again. In 1995, Fred Harari, a Jewish tenant of a retail property on 125th Street who operated Freddy’s Fashion Mart, sought to evict his longtime subtenant, a black-owned record store called the Record Shack. Beginning that August, Mr. Sharpton led a series of marches against the planned eviction. Protesters led by Mr. Sharpton’s National Action Network picketed outside the store day after day, referring to Jews as “bloodsuckers” and threatening, “We’re going to burn and loot the Jews.” At one point Mr. Sharpton told protesters, “We will not stand by and allow them to move this brother so that some white interloper can expand his business.” Never mind that the building was actually owned by a black Pentecostal church.
Then, on Dec. 8, 1995, a protester named Roland J. Smith Jr. entered Mr. Harari’s store, told all the black customers to leave, shot several remaining customers and set the store on fire. The gunman fatally shot himself, and seven store employees died of smoke inhalation.
***
Why is a person with such a sordid history — one for which he has offered nothing more than weak apologies for wishing he’d “done more to heal rather than harm” — enjoying the support of such a determinedly antiracist political party? For a few reasons that I can see.
The first is President Barack Obama. Before 2008, Mr. Sharpton had largely remained at the fringe of the Democratic Party. That changed because of Mr. Obama’s candidacy. Mr. Obama was catching flak from his left among African-Americans unhappy about his relative moderation on race-related policies, including his disavowal of his former pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright. The candidate needed a black “leader” to defend him and deflect criticism. One was found in Mr. Sharpton, who was cultivated by Mr. Obama’s closest aide, Valerie Jarrett.
In short order, Mr. Sharpton became a political kingmaker. In 2011, he got his own show on MSNBC. Between 2009 and 2014 he’d visited the White House 61 times. All of this has left the Democrats joined at the hip with an exemplar of failed black leadership.
The second reason Democrats have rushed to Mr. Sharpton’s defense is South Carolina. Given the critical importance of that state’s early primary election, and the crucial role the black vote is sure to play in that contest, Democrats running for president have had to kiss Mr. Sharpton’s ring — and cover his derrière.
The third, and most powerful, reason is that Mr. Sharpton now has the right enemy: Donald Trump. Democrats seem unable to do two things at once: condemn Mr. Trump and refuse to defend ideas and people that are not worthy of being defended. Instead, anything he criticizes, however plausible that criticism, becomes something they feel compelled to rally behind.

This is a losing strategy. Progressives have been bluffing on the race issue for years now: downplaying black-on-black urban violence, ignoring the polarizing effects of racial identity politics, maintaining a code of silence on the collapse of the black family and more. Mr. Trump knows it.
If Democrats cannot distinguish between Mr. Sharpton’s hucksterism and genuine moral leadership on race and justice in America, I assure you that many moderate voters in battleground states will have no trouble doing so. Shouting “racist” at Mr. Trump, even if there is truth to the accusation, will gain Democrats nothing. The president cannot be further damaged by that epithet. Meantime, he wins votes every time a prominent Democratic politician overreacts to his provocations by defending the indefensible.
 

SongSungAU

Midas Member
Midas Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2010
Messages
6,737
Likes
10,650
I gotta tell ya, I don't lay awake at night worrying what a Communist leader pays his drones.
Perhaps the point of the post was to say Bernie is a hypocrite.
He didn't raise their pay, he cut their hours.
 

SongSungAU

Midas Member
Midas Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2010
Messages
6,737
Likes
10,650
WC190729.jpg
 

SongSungAU

Midas Member
Midas Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2010
Messages
6,737
Likes
10,650
CW190620.jpg
 

SongSungAU

Midas Member
Midas Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2010
Messages
6,737
Likes
10,650
#WalkAway with Brandon Straka Special Event l Rhyan Glezman Interview l (1:39:15)


Premiered Jul 28, 2019 by #WalkAway Campaign​
Brandon Straka Interviews Pete Buttigieg's Brother In-law Rhyan Glezman for this Special Edition of #WalkAway with Brandon Straka.​
 

SongSungAU

Midas Member
Midas Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2010
Messages
6,737
Likes
10,650
“Why didn’t I hear about this?” (17 min 56 sec):


Premiered Jul 31, 2019 by #WalkAway Campaign​
 

SongSungAU

Midas Member
Midas Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2010
Messages
6,737
Likes
10,650

Joe King

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
9,015
Likes
9,930
Location
Instant Gratification Land

SongSungAU

Midas Member
Midas Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2010
Messages
6,737
Likes
10,650
ML190803.jpg
 

SongSungAU

Midas Member
Midas Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2010
Messages
6,737
Likes
10,650
#WalkAway Black Americans Town Hall - Los Angeles (1:41:40):


Published on Aug 11, 2019 by #WalkAway Campaign​
Panel: Brandon Straka, Isaiah Washington, Joy Villa, An0moly, Angela Stanton King, Major Williams, Jesse Lee Peterson​
 

D-FENZ

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
2,168
Likes
4,898
At an event today talking with a guy from CA. Hates it! Loves the midwest. NOTHING good to say about any politicans. Does not like Trump's talk but likes his actions. Wants to move out to get away from homeless and taxes.
This is not good news.

They used to like Texas and Colorado too. Those places are now well advanced into that familiar drain circling pattern . Problem is that when they move they bring their lunacy and votes with them.

They have no clue. The grass is greener on the other side of the fence because they're not over there pissing on it.