78
Comments (34)
sorted by:
15
AlcoholicRetard 15 points ago +16 / -1

FDR you retard.

2
Devildtails [S] 2 points ago +5 / -3

I stand corrected. No president has ever won three and only three elections; the point being Trump won in 2020 but was denied his seat due to election fraud, so a winning run in 2024 would rightfully entitle him to winning three elections, but only being inaugurated twice. I wasn’t equating FDR’s four winning terms with this scenario of President Trump winning three and only three terms.

1
AmericanJawa 1 point ago +1 / -0

I stand corrected.

Yes, and you really ought to just leave it at that and accept your blunder rather than trying to make excuses.

0
Devildtails [S] 0 points ago +1 / -1

Yes, and you really ought to just leave it at that and accept your blunder rather than trying to make excuses.

Sure thing Hitler. Or, I’ll communicate as I see fit. Why is this a problem for you?

0
AmericanJawa 0 points ago +1 / -1

You are aware that calling people 'Hitler' doesn't convince people that you're right, are you not?

0
Cheesecakecrush 0 points ago +1 / -1

Let him save a little face you frickin toad. Its enough he admitted he was wrong.

1
AmericanJawa 1 point ago +1 / -0

If it was 'just' admitting he was wrong, fine.

Turning around and trying to call people Hitler and cover his but with spin on how his intentions were good, not so much.

0
Devildtails [S] 0 points ago +1 / -1

You do realize Hitler wanted a master race who behaved precisely the way he wanted them to, don’t you?

0
AmericanJawa 0 points ago +1 / -1

What is it about being called out on a mistake and receiving genuine criticism and insisting on making it about Hitler?

You said that if Trump won in 2024, he'd be "THE FIRST PRESIDENT IN U.S. HISTORY TO WIN THREE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS", making an obvious mistake that shows ignorance of basic US history.

Rather than just accept that you messed up when people call you out on it and planning to do better next time, you insist on getting a pass on said obvious mistake based on "intentions", as if "intentions" somehow means that nobody should offer up any criticism, constructive or otherwise.

0
Devildtails [S] 0 points ago +1 / -1

You didn’t follow the threads, are intellectually dishonest, and are completely misguided. Get up to speed or walk away.

5
becky21k1 5 points ago +5 / -0

... since FDR?

5
TheUsurper 5 points ago +5 / -0

Who won four times

-4
Devildtails [S] -4 points ago +2 / -6

No, it was intended to mean three and only three elections. But you already knew that.

0
becky21k1 0 points ago +1 / -1

I thought it meant somebody was drunk, frankly

4
Ghostphaez 4 points ago +4 / -0

Our education system is failing us.

2
Big_Sam_Handwich 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yep. Seems that way.

-3
Devildtails [S] -3 points ago +2 / -5

It was a poorly worded title, but you should have recognized the intent; unless you are lacking in basic reasoning and comprehension skills. No surprise.

2
Ghostphaez 2 points ago +2 / -0

Don't try to turn this around on me, you halfwit!

1
Devildtails [S] 1 point ago +3 / -2

Nobody is turning anything on anyone. You opened your mouth. Misspoke. Got called out on it. Now everyone sees you for what you are.

0
Ghostphaez 0 points ago +1 / -1

LOL, you fucking idiot - YOU'RE the one who misspoke, not me!!

-1
Devildtails [S] -1 points ago +1 / -2

My title was poorly worded but easily understood for its true meaning. You made sweeping allegations that aren’t warranted by this poorly worded title. Those unwarranted allegations are where you misspoke. Denial is a sad place to be. Get help.

1
Ghostphaez 1 point ago +1 / -0

Fucking troll!

-2
Devildtails [S] -2 points ago +1 / -3

Hit a nerve? No surprise. Find help, you need it.

1
AmericanJawa 1 point ago +1 / -0

but you should have recognized the intent

"Good intentions over results" is how Democrats fail upwards.

The more you try to argue your way out of your mistake rather than just accepting that you done goofed, the deeper a hole you dig for yourself.

0
Devildtails [S] 0 points ago +1 / -1

The more you try to argue your way out of your mistake rather than just accepting that you done goofed, the deeper a hole you dig for yourself.

Selective quotes can destroy your narrative. Here’s the one you should have captured and sent to your comrade:

I stand corrected. No president has ever won three and only three elections.

1
AmericanJawa 1 point ago +1 / -0

Yes, I'm aware you said that.

It just looks stupid and arrogant as "I need to cover my butt" post-mistake spin.

0
Devildtails [S] 0 points ago +1 / -1

You lack the skills to properly interpret obvious meaning. You disregard outright explanations. You see what you want to see, believe what you want to believe. In the real world that’s called living in a fantasy world. Denial is a sad place to be.

1
AmericanJawa 1 point ago +1 / -0

PRESIDENT TRUMP MAY BE THE FIRST PRESIDENT IN U.S. HISTORY TO WIN THREE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS

It's a blatantly incorrect statement with no qualifiers.

FDR won three elections, then he won a fourth election on top of it.

The only obvious meaning is a historically inaccurate one.

Yes, you admitted you were wrong. Had you stopped there, you would have been in the clear.

Instead, you're trying to retroactively make it about "Winning exactly three times" as if somehow winning exactly three times is special somehow, and feel the need to get defensive and blame other people for your mistake, including insisting on calling people Hitler and comparing people with Communists.

0
Devildtails [S] 0 points ago +1 / -1

Instead, you're trying to retroactively make it about "Winning exactly three times" as if somehow winning exactly three times is special somehow, and feel the need to get defensive and blame other people for your mistake, including insisting on calling people Hitler and comparing people with Communists.

FDR won three times...until he won his fourth election. After that, he was a four time winner, never again to be a three time winner. Congress objected to his multiple runs and passed the 22nd amendment, prohibiting any president from ever serving more than 10 years. This change necessarily means no president will ever win three elections again unless the law changes—highly unlikely, or someone wins an election but isn’t inaugurated for some reason like fraud—like what happened in 2020. It is unlikely anyone will ever lose to fraud and prove it, but Trump and his supporters have overwhelmingly demonstrated they won, but fraud denied their rightful place. So yes, unbeknownst to you, it is special somehow to win three elections following the adoption of the 22nd amendment, you are just too stupid to realize it and keep shooting your mouth off like the Hitler you want to be. Run along son and spend more time learning what’s going on before demonstrating your ignorance for the world to see. You are embarrassing yourself.

2
AbrahamLincoln 2 points ago +2 / -0

And what difference does that make, if someone else gets to serve the term?

1
Devildtails [S] 1 point ago +2 / -1

The people will have elected President Trump for a third term (assuming a 2024 win and inauguration), regardless of the fraudulent election installing Biden in 2021.

1
Junionthepipeline 1 point ago +1 / -0

Not with dominion