Woke as fuck protesters crash Trump/Julius Caesar murder play

[Johan]

Oh, bravo M. Nostradamus.
But being right 3 out of 3 doesn't mean you can't be wrong, doesn't mean you wil be right on the 4th and the 5th time.
All streaks have an end. And I believe yours streak's gonna end in 2020, if it doesn't end in 2018.

 

[Jack Davenport]

Oh, bravo M. Nostradamus.
But being right 3 out of 3 doesn't mean you can't be wrong, doesn't mean you wil be right on the 4th and the 5th time.
All streaks have an end. And I believe yours streak's gonna end in 2020, if it doesn't end in 2018.

€ 1000.00

 

[Straight Shooter]

My track record is actually 50-50 :
- In 2012 I predicted Obama would win over Romney.
- In 2014 I did not made any predictions.
- In 2016 I predcted Hillary would win against Trump

I'm perfect so far. Since I came eligible to vote in 2008:
-2008 I predicted an Obama win
-2010 I predicted a GOP win in the midterms
-2012 I predicted an Obama win
-2016 I predicted a Trump win
-2017 I predicted a Macron win

I'm usually never wrong about these things

 

[Jack Davenport]

That was not a prediction asshat.
,
You started playing that reverse mojo shit after I started doing it.

Lying sack of shit.

 

[sean miguel]

My track record is actually 50-50 :
- In 2012 I predicted Obama would win over Romney.
- In 2014 I did not made any predictions.
- In 2016 I predcted Hillary would win against Trump

So basically you're as accurate as a coin flip.

I'm ashamed to say I was wrong in 2016 and predicted a fairly easy win for Hillary. I've never been so glad to be wrong in my life. Though if you look at my state-by-state predictions, my accuracy is pretty astonishing as I correctly predicted Hillary would win California (she trounced him by 3 million) and that Trump would win Texas, South Carolina, Alabama, Idaho and Montana. I could go on, but I'm not one to brag.

So suck it, bitches.

 

[bodie54]

The only people appalled by his tweets are his detractors and the MSM whom he circumvents when he tweets.

Circumvents how? The MSM and his detractors have easy access to all of them :dunno:
You mean because he often avoids direct immediate interaction with the MSM by using them? How does that serve him or anybody else being as it just provokes more potential misunderstanding and confrontation in the end?

He cannot go onto detail in 140 characters, but the general premise of his tweets are accurate. Even the Obama surveillance tweet was correct.

It wasn't an "Obama surveillance" tweet.
He stated, very plainly, specifically and personally: “iust found out that Obama had my ‘wires tapped’ in Trump Tower just before the victory. Nothing found. This is McCarthyism!” “How low has President Obama gone to tap my phones during the very sacred election process. This is Nixon/Watergate. Bad (or sick) guy!”

That tweet has been proven to be 100% wrong.

He is right far more than he is wrong.

Really? Sure doesn't appear that way http://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/statements/byruling/false/

Possibly my all time favorite: "An 'extremely credible source' has called my office and told me that @BarackObama's birth certificate is a fraud."

 

[Jack Davenport]

Circumvents how? The MSM and his detractors have easy access to all of them :dunno:
You mean because he often avoids direct immediate interaction with the MSM by using them? How does that serve him or anybody else being as it just provokes more potential misunderstanding and confrontation in the end?

He cannot go onto detail in 140 characters, but the general premise of his tweets are accurate. Even the Obama surveillance tweet was correct.

It wasn't an "Obama surveillance" tweet.
He stated, very plainly, specifically and personally: “iust found out that Obama had my ‘wires tapped’ in Trump Tower just before the victory. Nothing found. This is McCarthyism!” “How low has President Obama gone to tap my phones during the very sacred election process. This is Nixon/Watergate. Bad (or sick) guy!”

That tweet has been proven to be 100% wrong.

He is right far more than he is wrong.

Really? Sure doesn't appear that way http://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/statements/byruling/false/

Possibly my all time favorite: "An 'extremely credible source' has called my office and told me that @BarackObama's birth certificate is a fraud."

.

Folks this isn't your garden variety " I was willing to give Trump a chance until he started going off the deep end on Twitter." Lib.

He cannot go into detail on Twitter. Obama surveiled him. He used dubious tactics to be able to "tapp" him.

Trump is right again.

www.politifact.com

:1orglaugh

You can always tell when a lib is in a bind, they go to leftwing sources like politifact and snopes.

I'll remove you from the heralded intellectual honesty list.

 

[mongo18]

Hmm, angry trumpa loompas are sending death threats to theaters that have nothing to do with the Julius Caesar production - https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-to-the-wrong-theater/?utm_term=.404a362642bc

"Woke as fuck" or "triggered snowflake beta cucks"?

 

[Jack Davenport]

Only liberals can be "snowflakes" or "cucks".

Dumbfuck trigglypuff.

 

[Ace Boobtoucher]

 

[bodie54]

You can always tell when a lib is in a bind, they go to leftwing sources like politifact and snopes.

What bind? I can understand if his penchant for ignorance, falsehoods and lack of impulse control makes you uncomfortable, but one would think your heralded intellectual honesty would enable you to grant that penchant exists, particularly when the evidence is so voluminous and so readily accessible.

I'll remove you from the heralded intellectual honesty list.

Well that would be a misguided thing to do, but if it comforts you somehow go right ahead :dunno:

 

[Jack Davenport]

I find it interesting that you take issue with Trump claiming he has "an extremely credible source" but the NYT and WaPo can simply claim "sources" and run a front page story based upon what some still wet behind the ears journo comes running into the editorial board room waving around in their hands.

 

[bodie54]

I find it interesting that you take issue with Trump claiming he has "an extremely credible source" but the NYT and WaPo can simply claim "sources" and run a front page story based upon what some still wet behind the ears journo comes running into the editorial board room waving around in their hands.

I find it interesting because he's the foremost outspoken critic of such sources. Therefore that smacks of hypocrisy to me.