Subject: Re: This is exactly why Hillary lost.
On Thursday, November 9, 2017 at 7:46:07 AM UTC-8, BTSinAustin wrote:
> On Wednesday, November 8, 2017 at 4:01:22 PM UTC-6, VegasJerry wrote:
> > On Wednesday, November 8, 2017 at 12:17:13 PM UTC-8, BTSinAustin wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, November 7, 2017 at 12:01:20 PM UTC-6, risky biz wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday, November 7, 2017 at 4:27:57 AM UTC-8, irishra...@gmail.com wrote:
> > <snip’n shit>
> > > > > Irish Mike
> > > > >
> > > > > Obama’s legacy is President Trump
> > > >
> > > > An 'epic loss', then, is when a candidate gets almost 3 million more votes?
> > > Come on Risky, you're smart enough to know it's not how many total votes you get but where
> > Come on Austin, you're smart enough to know what “epic loss” means.
> > Jerry ‘n Vegas
> > > Hillary could have gotten 3 million more votes in Ca or Trump could have gotten 3 million more
> > > in TX and it would have changed squat. Now some states mattered, you know like Michigan and
> > > Wisconsin? Save the one weird electoral vote in Maine, she might have gone over the top had
> > > she not totally ignored them. We will never know.
> > >
> > > > And how is it possible to 'demonize' Crooked Donald?
> > >
> > > And yes, losing to an orange monkey is an EPIC loss.
> And yes, losing to an orange monkey is an EPIC loss.
What do you call the losses of the Republican candidates who ran against Barack Obama? Tremendous,
fantastic, gigantic, monumental, epic losses? I don't recall you explaining that at either time.