In Ann McFeatters’ column “Dithering Democrats handing election to Trump,” published in Sunday’s News-Post, she states: “Trump won in 2016 because millions of voters feel left out, ignored and dissed.” Ms. McFeatters, you are so clearly wrong, and either totally miss, or choose to ignore, why those “millions of voters” (including me) cast their ballots for President Donald Trump. It’s not because she called us “deplorables.” It’s not because of Benghazi and the 30,000 emails, and it’s not because of her and her husband’s disgraceful past behavior. She thought her election was simply a formality — the first woman president, it’s my turn, etc., so she took those swing states for granted, and when she didn’t campaign, or even visit some states, Trump stepped in and took them from her. Yes, I know she won the popular vote, but that aside, the overriding reason why she lost the election was not because voters felt left out, ignored and dissed. She lost simply because the people don’t like her and they don’t trust her! We didn’t like or trust her then, we don’t like or trust her now, and that won’t change no matter how you spin it.

Anthony M. DeShiro

Ijamsville

(127) comments

KellyAlzan

Now that this comment thread has run its course, all in all, at the end of the day, do ya’ll wanna know who won? PUTIN won. That’s who won. PUTIN

threecents

The reasons she lost were deplorable, and history will bare that out.

public-redux

...bear it out... Unless you were punning.

KellyAlzan

Anyone wanna talk about Trump’s subsidies to prop up farmers hurt by tariffs is good ol’ Socialism. Where Trump supporters that hate Socialism?! 😂🤣

prg45fan

I see that without the biasness of the liberal moderator the MAGA team is Winning again. I, along with all the other Trump supporters will never be tired of winning. Are you leftists not tired of losing yet? You should really take a ride on the Trump train. It is very exciting and rewarding in it's own right. Good bye for now and enjoy the rest of your day. MLCA in 2020 with a landslide of electoral AND popular vote win.

KR999

[thumbup][thumbup][thumbup][thumbup][thumbup] prg.

DickD

2020 will be a repeat of 2018!

richardlyons

[wink]

hayduke2

Another drive by comment by prg... Seems to be carrying water for the conservative posters.

prg45fan

I believe that to engage in an argument/debate/ discussion with people that will never change their minds about the issue for whatever reason: simpleton hatred because their candidate lost appears to be the biggest reason here since if he was still a Democrat doing the same positive things he is doing now for this country he would be a hero to all the haters. But he is now a Republican and you all see what is going on 24/7 in and on all media outlets. It would be an abject lesson in futility and I refuse to participate, for the most part. Have a great evening everyone and remember to vote for Trump in 2020. It is good for what ails you.[wink]

KellyAlzan

Comical spin, Anthony! Being beat by 3 million votes is what happened to Donald, and he is still bitter that Hilary beat him. You do not lose an election (by 3 mil) because you’re so well liked!

jsklinelga

Kelly

Besides being a "dead horse" argument, we should be very happy the popular vote did not decide the election. There was talk of illegal voters and fraudulent voters. It did not matter. if it did matter there would be an uprising. Do yo truthfully think people would trust and accept the vote tallies from California? But thankfully it is a moot point. Great fodder though (the popular vote total) for victim politics though.

KellyAlzan

So many horrible current issues you are either ignoring or now aware of. You write as if I’m not abreast of issues. Will I list them for you? No. You can do your own research.

DickD

Why would we be happy to get a racist crook, Jim.. Just read the Mueller report.

awteam2000

JSK, “ fraudulent” didn’t you just “ cut and paste”a letter to the editor and claim it as yours by signing your name to it? Now you’re talking of fraudulent votes in California?Wow 😲. Forget about California, just look closer to home ....



Trump won the electoral college by winning Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania with a combined total difference in vote count over Hillary of 77,000. Trump lost Maryland by more than 77,000 votes.



Please stop “cut and pasting” republican talking points. That’s lazy.

jerseygrl42

Well said Anthony; she has been a cheat and a crook her entire adult and even stole furniture from the Whitehouse when Bill's time was up...she is a LOWLIFE

KR999

“We came out of the White House not only dead broke, but in debt.” Sound familiar jersey? [lol]

DickD

Right after George Bush left the Great Recession for Obama to clean up.

awteam2000

And that why you voted for Trump?🙇‍♂️

Comment deleted.
rikkitikkitavvi

Still beating Orange Man Bad drum?

Dwasserba

Yeah well Trump is sooooo much better in the world's eyes, every tweet is such a delight, and certainly Kellyanne and Sarah and the many colorful adjunct characters he's introduced to us have enriched our lives, how can we ever thank you as you deserve

rikkitikkitavvi

About time you came to your senses Deb. Congratulations on your re-birth. Welcome to the right side of history.[love]

hayduke2

All you Trump supporters who didn't like Hillary and overlook the many flaws in this man. What say you to https://cathedral.org/have-we-no-decency-a-response-to-president-trump.html?fbclid=IwAR0ygzdp3OwVIMXSO0hSCGVc00IbKnmemicMmZHg3RWcOOx5J-nycrJHCmU

Obadiah Plainsmen

What says me. We all are entitled to our opinion/s on the state of the USA. I believe the Episcopal church is part of the Church of Laodicea and this is what Jesus said Rev 3 15-16 "I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot; I wish that you were cold or hot. 16 So because you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of My mouth". I pray that they change and come back to the glory of God.

public-redux

I’ve always liked that the No True ChristianTM meme goes right back to the very start of Christianity. It’s a tradition.

Obadiah Plainsmen

And that's your opinion, isn't America great you can post opposite opinions on government and religion without the fear of government censorship.

public-redux

Yup, as a minority, I’ve always felt grateful that I don’t live in a democracy. I imagine True ChristiansTM, being a tiny minority themselves, are as grateful as me.

Obadiah Plainsmen

they probably are.

awteam2000

I thought it meant the hot water would have certain benefits to the Laodiceans (e.g. healing qualities, relaxation), and the cold water would have benefits, too (e.g. good to drink). But what about the lukewarm, sulfur water? This would truly make us gag! This is why Jesus says, “I will spit [literally vomit] you out of My mouth” (Rev. 3:16). If you’ve ever had a cup of lukewarm, sulfur water, you’ll know why Jesus says this; it tastes like raw eggs: putrid. Nothing more.

Obadiah Plainsmen

Hint; it has nothing to do with water.

awteam2000

Are you sure?



Laodicea was an ancient city built on the river Lycus In today Turkey. The local population had early converts to Christianity. The metaphor by John, written in the ancient Greek language, was translated as words spoken by Jesus, choosing between “cold or hot”, “cold”as total negative and “hot” as being extremely zealous. A middle of the road stance was thought to pollute the pure.

However more recent interpretation of the text suggest that this metaphor was about water supply of the city, which was lukewarm, in contrast to the hot springs at nearby Hierapolis and the cold, pure waters of Colossae.



Just sayin’🤷‍♂️


public-redux

awteam, Surely you aren’t suggesting that there might be more than one plausible interpretation of an ancient text?

hayduke2

So, you can't directly refute the jist of the article that is used to honor American heroes and others. You pray THEY come back to the glory of God - step off your soap box.

Obadiah Plainsmen

It's an opinion!!!! Why should I refute it? They will not listen to me as I don't listen to them. You are just upset that you did not get the response you were hoping for. And I would have to lower myself from my high horse to get on your soapbox.

hayduke2

I was just looking for a reasoned response... Sorry you didn't understand that.

Obadiah Plainsmen

A reasoned response occurs when two meet face to face and they can look into the eyes of each other and can debate with dignity and maturity. Not in a public domain chat room when one can be called a racist and whatever with no evidence .

hayduke2

I didn't call you anything - you can always have a reasoned response without name calling or denigrating.

rikkitikkitavvi

https://www.theepochtimes.com/the-electoral-college-works_2711781.html

Comment deleted.
rikkitikkitavvi

You are right. She would be more of a continuous solar flare of lies and deceit.

hayduke2

To the author of the letter : So, since 40-44 % have a positive view of the president and 51-53 % have a negative view of the president, including his honesty and trust, does this mean you won't vote for him again?

rikkitikkitavvi

You and those polls again. Geeeesh!

KellyAlzan

Yes those polls. And they have been spot on.

KR999

Yep, just like they were “spot on” right up until about, what, 10:00 P.M. Nov. 8th, 2016? [lol][lol][lol][lol][lol][lol][lol]

Dwasserba

The polls that matter are on election day VOTE DEMOCRATIC

KellyAlzan

The polls have been and still are spot on. The end margin of error is an insane low number.


Polls were based on, and always were based on, popular vote. They were so accurate that I’m a more of a believer in polls today than ever before.





Knowledge is king


KR999

Yeah Dwasserba, and what did the polls say on Nov. 8th, 2016?

rikkitikkitavvi

[yawn]

DickD

https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AwrE1xlXpUFd0KkApF9pCWVH;_ylu=X3oDMTBydWNmY2MwBGNvbG8DYmYxBHBvcwM0BHZ0aWQDBHNlYwNzcg--?No sitting President with a less than 50 percent approval rating, has ever been re elected,1980 all over again?

richardlyons

Anthony is part of the base, so there is no reasoning with him.

KellyAlzan

To this date, No sitting president has ever been re-elected to a second term by the electrical college while losing the popular vote. The odds are against Donald.


rikkitikkitavvi

Not hardly Kelly.

KellyAlzan

What do you mean not hardly? What I wrote is 110% factual.

Dwasserba

Famous last words. Shhhhh More voting, less yammering

awteam2000

Actually 110% indicates a percent greater than the whole. At least that’s what I learned in grade school.

awteam2000

Rik,

Here’s some elementary questions for you ...



1. Sally had a recipe that called for 4 cups of fruit fillings but Sally added 4.4 cups of fruit fillings. What percent of fruit fillings did Sally add?



2. Johnny planned to sell 100 widgets but Johnny exceeded his expectations by 10 widgets. What percent of widgets did Johnny sell?



Hint it was more then 100%.



In conversational slang the term 110% means overwhelmingly, exceeds.

KR999

Big deal, Kelly. Only 5 out of 45 presidents elected won by only the Electoral College. That’s barely 11%.

awteam2000

That clearly doesn’t play well for Trump. Now he’s wearing Hillary’s shoes 👠. Many voters will come out to simply vote against him, like Tony did against Hillary.

KellyAlzan

KR99 - exactly my point.



He has a slim chance.

awteam2000

It’s clear, no one voted for Trump on merit. Anthony admits he voted for Trump because he didn’t like Hillary. Obvious his vote was only a protest vote and didn’t make any difference in the election. It wasn’t relevant. Maryland went for Hillary by 61% she won all 10 electoral votes.

DickD

Tony, I will agree Hillary was arrogant. But look at all the reasons not to vote for Trump. Those reasons far outweigh the reasons you listed for not voting for Hillary m

KR999

Voting for Trump to keep the angry old white woman with all her attendant evils from winning was the only reason necessary.

hayduke2

One might make the case that voting for an arrogant, boastful old white man and all his attendant evils was the only reason some support him. Equally as sad.

matts853

👍🏻

DickD

[thumbup]

KR999

I agree hay, and I have always said that every 4 years the presidential elections are down to the lesser of two evils. And in ‘16 it held true again, the lesser one won.

hayduke2

KR - they are many ( at least 3.5 million ) who don't agree with that statement but you know that.

KR999

And I couldn’t care less about what they think, hay, just as they don’t care what I think.

rikkitikkitavvi

Still is. There is none. Only according to the die-hard Clintonians.

Obadiah Plainsmen

Hillary won the popular vote, then she is the best president we never had!

DickD

True.

Dwasserba

She looks better every day that passes.

KR999

[thumbup][thumbup][thumbup][lol] OP!

rikkitikkitavvi

HAHAHAHAAH@OP

gary4books

Hillary lost because people want to believe lies. Some of the time for some of the people.

KR999

Seems to me one reason she lost was because not everyone believed her lies.

DickD

And they believed Trump's lies!

KR999

Dick, I’ve asked you before to name just one politician who has never lied, no matter how many times. You keep whining about Trump lying, but can’t answer my question. As rik said recently, “lather, rinse, repeat Dick.”

hayduke2

George Washington - I can not tell a lie when he chopped down the Cherry tree....

DickD

Tell me a sitting POTUS that has told as many lies as Donald Trump!

KR999

Quit deflecting Dick and just answer my question.

hayduke2

KR - can you name one human being who has never lied? There are degrees of everything humans do - name me a president who lies as blatently as this president ( not your opinion, but factual data please ). Bet you can't.

gary4books

You are what you believe.

KR999

Excellent letter Mr. DeShiro, you hit the nail smack dab on the head with all of your points. [thumbup][thumbup][thumbup]

knahs25

And there are many who do not like or trust the winner either.

KellyAlzan

Guess the writer didn’t get the memo. Hillary won. She won by 3 million more votes. Popular votes. From we the people.

jsklinelga

KellyAlzan

If the US ever changed to popular vote, where the county of Los Angeles would hold more voting power than 43 States, there would no longer be a United States. And there would no longer be the resources of the 43 States to support LA..

KellyAlzan

Bottom line is - America voted against Donald. The letter writer is misinformed.

User1

Not the America I live in.....it’s called “Reality”!

FCPS-Principal

Actually a popular vote is the only system where every vote counts equally. Your ideas of a jurisdiction of "county of Los Angeles" and "popular vote" is an oxymoron because the only voting boundary is the whole country. The X million votes of Los Angeles county would hold no more power than any other group of the same number of votes in any other jurisdiction.

tonyc51

Hopefully you never taught civics to impressionable students. This country was not founded as a pure democracy, it is a republic, if you cannot understand the difference, look it up. "Democracy vs. Republic. In a republic, a constitution or charter of rights protects certain inalienable rights that cannot be taken away by the government, even if it has been elected by a majority of voters. In a "pure democracy," the majority is not restrained in this way and can impose its will on the minority."

hayduke2

So Tony, why is the election of the president the only example of not electing by honoring the majority of votes. Are we only a Republic for the highest office?

tonyc51

Hayduke, you are correct, why>? Because that is the way the founders set up the constitution. But if you find it so egregious, they also built in a way to change the constitution. I would think that with all the attention to rights of minorities professed by the democrat party they would appreciate the fact that we live in a republic verses a "pure" democracy. Also there are numerous republics in the world, it is not that strange . For example Germany, Finland, France, Austria, Brazil, Italy, Costa Rica and many others.

matts853

Excellent point, Hayduke. Besides, the electoral college isn’t really an example of our Republic form of government. The congress and state/local legislatures are by virtue of the fact that the members of those respective bodies were independently elected by constituents in their jusridctcions, by majority vote. Those elected officials then vote on laws etc. where the majority rules.

rikkitikkitavvi

We have 50 state elections. Not 0ne National election. The popular vote is not in the Constitution. It is fluff.

tonyc51

The electors (in most states) that vote in the electoral college are selected by the majority of the individuals in the individual states, as Rikki stated we do not have a national election for any position in the US government. Those states that award electors proportionally, have in effect chosen at THE STATE LEVEL to deal with this in a more "pure democracy" form for that state. They are all state level decisions.

hayduke2

Tony - did they envision every electoral vote going to the winner of the popular vote? If they did, then why not have the popular vote decide?

hayduke2

Tony - still waiting for a reply to my last post....

gabrielshorn2013

Hay, it wasn't only the President not chosen by the popular vote. Until 1913 and the 17th ammendment, Senators were chosen by the state legislatures, giving more power to the state level. It is the Senate that gives all states parity in the Federal government. It is also the Senate that many believe gives small states an unfair amount of influence in the electoral college. The method of elector distribution is at the state level. The President is elected by the electors, as a compromise in the Constitution, without which, small states had little reason to join the Union.

hayduke2

Gabe - yada, yada - heard that argumetn many times. How about the following, especially the third paragraph.

"Hamilton and the other founders believed that the electors would be able to ensure that only a qualified person becomes President. They thought that with the Electoral College no one would be able to manipulate the citizenry. It would act as a check on an electorate that might be duped. Hamilton and the other founders did not trust the population to make the right choice. The founders also believed that the Electoral College had the advantage of being a group that met only once and thus could not be manipulated over time by foreign governments or others.



The Electoral College is also part of compromises made at the convention to satisfy the small states. Under the system of the Electoral College, each state had the same number of electoral votes as they have a representative in Congress. Thus no state could have less than 3. The result of this system is that in this election the state of Wyoming cast about 210,000 votes, and thus each elector represented 70,000 votes, while in California approximately 9,700,000 votes were cast for 54 votes, thus representing 179,000 votes per electorate. This creates an unfair advantage to voters in the small states whose votes count more than those people living in medium and large states.



One aspect of the electoral system that is not mandated in the constitution is the fact that the winner takes all the votes in the state. Therefore it makes no difference if you win a state by 50.1% or by 80% of the vote you receive the same number of electoral votes. This can be a recipe for one individual to win some states by large pluralities and lose others by small number of votes, and thus this is an easy scenario for one candidate winning the popular vote while another winning the electoral vote. This winner take all methods used in picking electors has been decided by the states themselves. This trend took place over the course of the 19th century.

Hamilton and the other founders believed that the electors would be able to ensure that only a qualified person becomes President. They thought that with the Electoral College no one would be able to manipulate the citizenry. It would act as a check on an electorate that might be duped. Hamilton and the other founders did not trust the population to make the right choice. The founders also believed that the Electoral College had the advantage of being a group that met only once and thus could not be manipulated over time by foreign governments or others.



The Electoral College is also part of compromises made at the convention to satisfy the small states. Under the system of the Electoral College, each state had the same number of electoral votes as they have a representative in Congress. Thus no state could have less than 3. The result of this system is that in this election the state of Wyoming cast about 210,000 votes, and thus each elector represented 70,000 votes, while in California approximately 9,700,000 votes were cast for 54 votes, thus representing 179,000 votes per electorate. This creates an unfair advantage to voters in the small states whose votes count more than those people living in medium and large states.



One aspect of the electoral system that is not mandated in the constitution is the fact that the winner takes all the votes in the state. Therefore it makes no difference if you win a state by 50.1% or by 80% of the vote you receive the same number of electoral votes. This can be a recipe for one individual to win some states by large pluralities and lose others by small number of votes, and thus this is an easy scenario for one candidate winning the popular vote while another winning the electoral vote. This winner take all methods used in picking electors has been decided by the states themselves. This trend took place over the course of the 19th century.

"Hamilton and the other founders believed that the electors would be able to ensure that only a qualified person becomes President. They thought that with the Electoral College no one would be able to manipulate the citizenry. It would act as a check on an electorate that might be duped. Hamilton and the other founders did not trust the population to make the right choice. The founders also believed that the Electoral College had the advantage of being a group that met only once and thus could not be manipulated over time by foreign governments or others.



The Electoral College is also part of compromises made at the convention to satisfy the small states. Under the system of the Electoral College, each state had the same number of electoral votes as they have a representative in Congress. Thus no state could have less than 3. The result of this system is that in this election the state of Wyoming cast about 210,000 votes, and thus each elector represented 70,000 votes, while in California approximately 9,700,000 votes were cast for 54 votes, thus representing 179,000 votes per electorate. This creates an unfair advantage to voters in the small states whose votes count more than those people living in medium and large states.



One aspect of the electoral system that is not mandated in the constitution is the fact that the winner takes all the votes in the state. Therefore it makes no difference if you win a state by 50.1% or by 80% of the vote you receive the same number of electoral votes. This can be a recipe for one individual to win some states by large pluralities and lose others by small number of votes, and thus this is an easy scenario for one candidate winning the popular vote while another winning the electoral vote. This winner take all methods used in picking electors has been decided by the states themselves. This trend took place over the course of the 19th century."




hayduke2

Wow - not sure why it printed the response twice. I apologize for that.

tonyc51

Response to Hay's 1:13 post, Why I did not respond. The best answer to that query is that some us have a life outside of this comment section, others not so much. It is up to the states to determine the apportionments of the electors by candidate.

gabrielshorn2013

Hay, as we have discussed before, your point about the third paragraph is irrelevant. Our system is what it is, and to whine about it here is just as irrelevant. If the EC was made of just the HoR, then it would be truly representative. But it's not. The EC is made up of the number of representatives and Senators from each state. FACT is that one body of Congress is proportional to its population, and the other body gives PARITY to all states, regardless of population. A compromise between the New Jersey and Virginia Plans. No compromise, no Union, and this argument would probably be moot because the US would not exist in its present form. The states may apportion their electors any way they want, as per the Constitution. Maryland gives all 10 of its electoral votes to the state winner, so it swings both ways. Have our Congressional Representative (I believe it is Trone now) introduce a bill into Congress to change the EC, or have our local State delegates introduce a bill at the State level apportioning electors proportional to their vote count in Maryland. Since that will result in Democrats ceding electoral votes to Republicans, that will never happen. Our system is our system, and I'm fine with it.

hayduke2

Fact - the one body you claim gives equal weight to all does just the opposite. That system gives outsized weight to those states with small populations. You can look up that fact for yourself. My "whining" is the same as your repeating the same mantra over and over.

gabrielshorn2013

Sorry hay, my "mantra" is based on a thorough understanding of how the US Constitution came to be, through years of study. Look up the New Jersey Plan, The Virginia Plan, and the Connecticut Compromise. That should explain it for you. Although I generally avoid Wikipedia as a source, it is easily accessible, and their articles in these instances are well documented with historical writings. We have the system we have, and it was a brilliant work through compromise. No compromise, no USA. It is fair for all states, even if you don't agree.

DickD

Yeah, we need a leader of land not people, Jim. Do you realize how ridiculous that is?

rikkitikkitavvi

"a leader of land" How does one "lead land"? You are losing it Dik.

KR999

Dick, do mean how ridiculous “a leader of land not people” is?

DickD

I was replying to Jim's ridiculous statement, pay attention,ric,

awteam2000

A electoral college employees a president of the land not the population. Right? Even Wyoming with a smaller population than DC has two senators where DC has none.

gabrielshorn2013

aw, every state has two Senators to give all states PARITY in the Senate. The District is not a state. It was carved out of MD and VA so that no state would contain the Capital, thus having undue influence on the government. At the time it was formed, most of it was either farm, forest, or swamp. Georgetown was a small river port city. The governance of the District was to be done by the Federal Government under the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1801. It was never meant to have Congressional representation.

awteam2000

But DC like Wyoming has a congressperson and three electoral votes. So why not 2 senators? Times do change.

gabrielshorn2013

aw, you do realize that the electors for DC are only due to passing the 23rd Amendment to the Constitution in 1961 for the purpose of voting for President. Their single Congressional representative has no voting power, as it should be. DC was established so no state contained the US Capital. Anyone that moved there after its establishment knew that. That is why Alexandria and Alexandria County (now Arlington County) successfully petitioned to be reverted back to Virginia.

FCPS-Principal

Actually she didn't win the popular vote. The popular vote was a tie, 0-0.

gary4books

Really? How does that compute?

KellyAlzan

He’s saying that in the end, the popular votes didn’t count. And he’s correct. “Every vote counts” is what has been drilled into our heads in school. Well, I’m 2016, we found that not to be true.

User1

Sorry, that’s not the way the election is run. It’s just for that reason that congress set up the Electoral College. So that ALL presidents aren’t elected by just three or four primarily Dimocratic states. Keep thinking that for another couple of years. TDS at its Best!

marinick1

[thumbup]

rikkitikkitavvi

This is TDS central.

KR999

TDS Central = Comedy Central, and the have their own show. It’s called “CNN.” [lol]

rikkitikkitavvi

ha! 1,000,000 illegal voters. 1,000,000 dead voters. 1,000,000 voter fraud votes. There is your 3,000,000 votes Kelly.

hayduke2

Please show me the proof of this claim. If you can't, then quit buying into fake news and made up stuff.

hayduke2

Come on rikki - show me the proof.

rikkitikkitavvi

Show me proof that my claim isn't true duke. Show your work.

hayduke2

Okay - https://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2016/nov/18/blog-posting/no-3-million-undocumented-immigrants-did-not-vote-/

hayduke2

Pitiful arguments rikki... That's like me asking you " Do you still kick your dog?"

hayduke2

Too funny rikki - that's the same commissiion that was forced to disband because they found bumpkis.. Nice try but you just proved my point. [lol][lol][lol][lol]

public-redux

Our problem is we are so bad at that we get caught cheating while the Dems are so good at it that’s there is no evidence.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/30/us/mccrae-dowless-indictment.html?action=click&module=Latest&pgtype=Homepage

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Engage ideas. This forum is for the exchange of ideas, insights and experiences, not personal attacks. Ad hominen criticisms are not allowed. Focus on ideas instead.
TURN OFF CAPS LOCK.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
No trolls. Off-topic comments and comments that bait others are not allowed.
No spamming. This is not the place to sell miracle cures.
Say it once. No repeat or repetitive posts, please.
Help us. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.