What would Hillary have to do for you to stop supporting/not vote for her?

[Tassman]

My friend, that is not a contest you can possibly hope to win. The cad's delusions far exceed anyone I've ever seen in politics.

http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-c...s/dxc-20247656

Personality disorders are characterised by behavioural patterns associated with intractable personal, social and workplace disruption...something particularly significant for a would-be US president requiring diplomacy skills and the ability to relate to world leaders. Such people are generally surrounded by social dysfunction and conflict with others....the last thing any nation needs.

http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-c...e/ovc-20247654

[Cow Poke]

Wait -- I thought this was supposed to be about Trump, not Obama!

[One Bad Pig]

1945, actually, if you count the Japanese firebombings that hit the west coast!

http://www.history.com/news/history-...g-world-war-ii

Eh, that's more "got lucky" than "invasion".

[Tassman]

Wait -- I thought this was supposed to be about Trump, not Obama!

[Roy]

Eh, I've had my disagreements with Roy, but calling hime Jorge Jr. is a little over the top, and he's got a good point here. Your first point has an odd qualifier ("was invaded"); US territory was invaded as recently as 1941. Now, San Marino is pretty insignificant given its size, but England is not a bad comparison. The US is among the oldest, but your insistence that it is THE oldest is a little more difficult to defend.

I note that San Marino doesn't qualify because it's been invaded and introduced popular voting, whereas the US does qualify despite it being invaded (1812) and introducing popular voting (17th amendment).

[Roy]

I think Roy is definitely one of our nicer 'bad guys'.

(kidding about the bad guys, Roy)

I'm glad to be bad.

[Roy]

He wants to misquote me...

I have not misquoted you.

[Roy]

Well, I don't really have anything further to add beyond my last post, which you didn't much address beyond acknowledging that you were being a jackass. I disagree with Roy on just about everything. I would think, though, that demonstrating that a certain assertion comes from a misquotation and that the facts are on your side would serve you better than being inflammatory in retaliation, even if you weren't a Christian.

OBP, thank you.

If LPOT can demonstrate that my signature is in any way a misquote or out of context, I will be happy to revert to the previous one.

[Sea of red]

I know I shouldn't.

It's about giving him what he deserves and showing him the attitude he has justly earned. If he can't respect others, I will not give him any sort of respect in return and he shown a history of refusing to have any sort of respect for others. Of course I know calling him Jorge Jr is being a jackass because he deserves every bit of disrespect he gets (and than some). He misquotes his opponents, just like Jorge does. He makes up things to make it easier to refute his opponents, just like Jorge does. He refutes to admit to the tiniest of errors, just like Jorge does. He can't even respect the beliefs of those who are not even his opponents, even while disagreeing with him, just like Jorge does. If he doesn't want to be called Jorge Jr, he should stop acting like Jorge. Until the time comes that he can show others the respect they deserve, I will continue to treat him the exact same way he treats others. Nothing more and nothing less.

I think you just can't stand that Roy doesn't take you all that seriously and just argues with you for the sport of it - like many others have. It's funny to hear you constantly harp on others for "not admitting to error" when anybody that has debated you a few times knows that perfectly describes your problem. No matter how it's broken down for you, no matter how many sources are provided, or how many people on your side tell you you're wrong about something, you'll dig your heels in the ground and say everybody else is wrong and/or call them names. I can't recall a single time you apologized for something or admitted to an opponent that you made a mistake. You're never wrong about anything, even on topics were others have actual expertise on something. It just burns you up when an ideological opponent is right and you are wrong.

Not everything is your fault but not everything is everybody else's fault either, like you want everybody to believe.

[Cow Poke]

I'm glad to be bad.

Then try harder!

[Cow Poke]

But you're perfectly OK with those same attributes in Obama, cause he's your guy.

[One Bad Pig]

I know I shouldn't.

Then why did you? You get all worked up when I join a conversation to criticize you in far milder terms, and your conversations with LPOT seldom end well even when they start on much better footing. Try exercising a little discretion.

[rogue06]

But you're perfectly OK with those same attributes in Obama, cause he's your guy.

Who could forget how Obama, early in his first term, went to Europe to assist Chicago's efforts to be named as the site of the Olympics. Essentially he told the Olympics committee that if they selected Chicago it would please him. Imagine the ego involved that thought that those guys would pick Chicago because they could make Obama happy with them.

Chicago was the first city eliminated.

[Yttrium]

But you're perfectly OK with those same attributes in Obama, cause he's your guy.

Just about all politicians have narcissism issues. That's normal. Being a politician is a glory hogging job. Trump's narcissism is well beyond that.

[Cow Poke]

Just about all politicians have narcissism issues. That's normal.

Sure

Being a politician is a glory hogging job. Trump's narcissism is well beyond that.

Trump's narcissism is just not as refined as Obama's -- Obama's a much more eloquent narcissist. Obama can make the oceans recede and heal the planet!