Carlos Estavez for Vice Prez

BIG DON. Sweetness

Yap

Carlos Estévez would go in perfectly with Drumpf and his love fest for Megyn Kelly. Since he beat a woman I know, Brittany Ashland, he would be a perfect counterpoint. Drumpf would love to add an abuser to his team.

Way to go Chicken Stacker, you even beat TMZ with the news!

---

The current delegate count and what's left to grab

---

The mind is a weird and mysterious place

Watching Bobby Knight stump for Trump. Kind of funny, really. Good ol' chair throwin' Bob Knight.

---

The mind is a weird and mysterious place

Fasten your seat belt folks it's gonna be an interesting six months....

---

"Sour Grapes make a bitter Whine." <(0)>

With the circus on over there, someone should introduce this...

Yeah that's the answer, more taxes. It's worked so well in GB and Europe. You have no crime, the best medical care in the universe without waiting, no unemployment, no homeless, no illegal immigration problem and total sovereignty and security without outside assistance from the US..........Oh wait.....

---

"Sour Grapes make a bitter Whine." <(0)>

Yeah that's the answer, more taxes. It's worked so well in GB and Europe. You have no crime, the best medical care in the universe without waiting, no unemployment, no homeless, no illegal immigration problem and total sovereignty and security without outside assistance from the US..........Oh wait.....

I have never heard an European country begging for assistance from the US.
Only from UN and NATO.

Fasten your seat belt folks it's gonna be an interesting six months....

Both are among the highest negatives of any Nominee.

BTW: Stop with the "My Candidate's Majority Negatives. Is less than Your Candidate's Majority Negatives." Silliness.

BTW 2: Can we start over. With two different people?

:( :( :(

We can and it is up to you to insure these two aren't available to run anymore.

---

Yeah that's the answer, more taxes. It's worked so well in GB and Europe. You have no crime, the best medical care in the universe without waiting, no unemployment, no homeless, no illegal immigration problem and total sovereignty and security without outside assistance from the US..........Oh wait.....

I have never heard an European country begging for assistance from the US.
Only from UN and NATO.

WWII? Kosovo? And just who do you think pays the bills NATO incurs?
I'll give you the answer, the American Taxpayer(or deficit borrower). Clyde's right again, the Gravy Train is about to stop.

"....the United States is subsidizing all other NATO members in terms of military expenditures to the amount of about $180 billion per year. But that is not the whole story. The U.S. is also subsidizing the economies of almost all other NATO members.

In 2015, the U.S. ran a trade in goods deficit with all but five NATO members (Netherlands, Belgium, Turkey, Luxembourg, and Iceland), and the sum of all American trade balances with NATO members was a net deficit of $121 billion.

The largest trade deficit laggards in NATO – from an American perspective – are Germany ($74 billion per year), Italy ($28 billion per year), France ($18 billion per year), and Canada ($15 billion per year).

Coincidentally, Germany, Canada, and Italy are also three of the top four defense spending laggards in the alliance – meaning they are double-dipping at the trough of free-loading. Coupled with its NATO defense expenditure deficit of $47 billion per year, Germany is being economically and militarily subsidized by the U.S. at a total of at least $120 billion per year. Canada is at $41 billion per year, and Italy sits at $49 billion per year.

Thus, if we include both military spending and trade deficits, the United States is subsidizing the remainder of NATO by at least $300 billion each year and growing."

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/03/annual_us_trade_in_good_deficit_with_nato_is_121_billion.html#ixzz478SYA6Dd

---

"Sour Grapes make a bitter Whine." <(0)>

I'm All For TURNING OFF Da U S of A Taxpayer Spigot to Da Rest of Da Vrold.



NOW and FOREVER More.

Time To GO DRY.

Turn Off Da Spigot to Da Vrold, and Make Hope REAL CHANGE

BIG DON fO Da BIG JOB.

Yap

---

May we All have a METAMORPHOSIS. REASON. GOoD JUDGEMENT and LOVE and ORDER!!!!!

Yeah that's the answer, more taxes. It's worked so well in GB and Europe. You have no crime, the best medical care in the universe without waiting, no unemployment, no homeless, no illegal immigration problem and total sovereignty and security without outside assistance from the US..........Oh wait.....

I have never heard an European country begging for assistance from the US.
Only from UN and NATO.

WWII? Kosovo? And just who do you think pays the bills NATO incurs?
I'll give you the answer, the American Taxpayer(or deficit borrower). Clyde's right again, the Gravy Train is about to stop.

"....the United States is subsidizing all other NATO members in terms of military expenditures to the amount of about $180 billion per year. But that is not the whole story. The U.S. is also subsidizing the economies of almost all other NATO members.

In 2015, the U.S. ran a trade in goods deficit with all but five NATO members (Netherlands, Belgium, Turkey, Luxembourg, and Iceland), and the sum of all American trade balances with NATO members was a net deficit of $121 billion.

The largest trade deficit laggards in NATO – from an American perspective – are Germany ($74 billion per year), Italy ($28 billion per year), France ($18 billion per year), and Canada ($15 billion per year).

Coincidentally, Germany, Canada, and Italy are also three of the top four defense spending laggards in the alliance – meaning they are double-dipping at the trough of free-loading. Coupled with its NATO defense expenditure deficit of $47 billion per year, Germany is being economically and militarily subsidized by the U.S. at a total of at least $120 billion per year. Canada is at $41 billion per year, and Italy sits at $49 billion per year.

Thus, if we include both military spending and trade deficits, the United States is subsidizing the remainder of NATO by at least $300 billion each year and growing."

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/03/annual_us_trade_in_good_deficit_with_nato_is_121_billion.html#ixzz478SYA6Dd

I must be missing something. When did a trade deficit become a subsidy? If the US is buying more off the Canada than it sells to Canada, then the US will have a trade deficit with Canada, right? At least that's what I understand by this from the Cato Institute:

Thus, a nation that saves more than it invests, such as Japan, will export its excess savings in the form of net foreign investment. In other words, it must run a capital account deficit. The money sent abroad as investment will return to the country as payments for its exports, which will be in excess of what the country imports, creating a corresponding trade surplus. A nation that invests more than it saves - the United States, for example - must import capital from abroad. In other words, it must run a capital account surplus. The imported capital allows the nation’s citizens to consume more goods and services than they produce, importing the difference through a trade deficit.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

I see Donald has started playing the "My opponent is a woman" card.

I must be missing something. When did a trade deficit become a subsidy? If the US is buying more off the Canada than it sells to Canada, then the US will have a trade deficit with Canada, right?

Bobby, don't bother the man with facts, he has a "belief" and is on a good rant. Can't wait to LMAO at his next rant.

---

I see Donald has started playing the "My opponent is a woman" card.

Drumpf's new campaign song?

---

Logical response to 'My opponent is a big bad man and is picking on me".

And the red button is a wonderful thing, I no longer have to see Bobbie's drivel.

---

"Sour Grapes make a bitter Whine." <(0)>

I see Donald has started playing the "My opponent is a woman" card.

As Hillary has always played her: "My opponent is a (fill-in the negatives) male" card.

They are two peas, in the same rotten pod.

A POX on Both.

Not content with "calling fellow posters inferior" you do the same to Ms Clinton (at least the third time for this type of accusation in this thread) while failing to provide any evidence (despite being asked on more than one occasion). Is it laziness on your part, do you expect us to accept what you say as true, some other reason? If "some other reason", would you be so kind as to tell us what this might be?

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

Are you saying that you Red-X each and everyone of bobby's posts?

I didn't say anything, you did. Bobbie attempted an unsolicited circular argument in PM land and I simply used the tools provided by the forum.

As to whose a simpleton.............

---

"Sour Grapes make a bitter Whine." <(0)>

Logical response to 'My opponent is a big bad man and is picking on me".

And the red button is a wonderful thing, I no longer have to see Bobbie's drivel.

Are you saying that you Red-X each and everyone of bobby's posts?
To be honest bobby's posts are probably a bit too advanced to be appreciated by simpletons.
You don't like his posts?

My guess is that JaundicedEye (Guy MkII?) has me on his filter/ignore list, though for some reason referred to this as the "red button". Shame really, as JaundicedEye earlier professed a desire for a conversation and exchange of ideas, which I imagine might be a little difficult if one deliberately refuses to take note of what others are saying.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

Are you saying that you Red-X each and everyone of bobby's posts?

I didn't say anything, you did. Bobbie attempted an unsolicited circular argument in PM land and I simply used the tools provided by the forum.

As to whose a simpleton.............

Interesting view of what happened, rather than derail this thread with trivia about the Drumpfinators installed in my browser, I sent him a PM. Not sure how an initial PM is anything other than "unsolicited", is it common practice to seek prior permission in a thread before sending one?

As for the circular argument thing, I have no idea what he's talking about, though I posted to this thread much of the rest of my PM when there was no acknowledgment (here).

Still, this is quickly deviating from the topic.

[ETA]On the question of "simpleton", perhaps it's a person that can't distinguish between "Bobbie" and "bobby" or "who's" and "whose", ;-)[/ETA]

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

My guess is that JaundicedEye (Guy MkII?) has me on his filter/ignore list, though for some reason referred to this as the "red button".

The reason being in the inbox there is a red-x button, which just puts the person into the filter list.

---