DiscussMormonism.com

Chap wrote:
Why do you let people wind you up in this way? Can't you ever resist it?

that may be a reasonable question if it was not asked by the source of the stupidity to be resisted.

maybe chap and KG would feel better if Hillary got a trophy.

Chap wrote:

Mayan Elephant wrote:[Trump] beat hillary

Well, and he did it despite getting three million votes less than she did. I mean, that kind of winning is really special.

well, there ya go. yep. that kind of losing is way special. bless her heart.

If you didn't vote for the solution (Clinton), you're part of the problem (Drumpf). And for context, Clinton is a solution in the same way almost any other politician would be a solution. Better than the moron we've got. here we go again. how could she be better? she can't even beat that wanker in ...

As long as there is a TV in the White House that has Fox news, and as long as he has access to a cell phone with tweeter, the man is going to tweet embarrassing crap and as long as he does that, there will be a cap on his approval. i would add the amount of time that he puts spicer and conway in fr...

If he wants the media to focus on his accomplishments and not the stupid sh** he says, maybe he should start accomplishing things and stop saying stupid sh**. And the best way for anyone to attract a lot of negative media attention is to insult them and then tell them to shut up. Weird how that gen...

Lemmie wrote:someone is regularly "shit-faced drunk" could certainly be used to harass a person in real life, in a way that "he posts like an idiot" cannot, .

and some people need both of those layers of unverifiable judgment to create a post, otherwise they would have nothing to say.

And no, I didn't point it out because I disagreed with your opinion on Russian aggression, I pointed it out because it comes uncomfortably close to violating Dr. Shades' in real life rule. oh for chrissakes Lemmie. schmo and kevin are two of the most disparaging-voiced people on here. they repeated...

I find it problematic at best. But apparently enough American's had no problem with it. i find it problematic and curious. americans may or may not have had a problem with it. it was a choice of a candidate with ties to foreign groups and individuals, or a candidate with ties to foreign groups and ...

Some Schmo wrote:..... deflect, again......

so you can't answer the question. i figured as much.