To: Be Careful
I question his judgment.
There’s no way any sane person should even consider voting for PIAPS!
4 posted on
09/25/2016 12:47:21 PM PDT by
sauropod
(Beware the fury of a patient man. I've lost my patience!)
To: sauropod
When he says he is voting for Hillary, for his safety, it always told me he wasn’t voting for her.
11 posted on
09/25/2016 12:51:21 PM PDT by
mancini
To: sauropod
As most of you know, I had been endorsing Hillary Clinton for president, for my personal safety, because I live in California. It isnt safe to be a Trump supporter where I live.
in other words, it was a joke
36 posted on
09/25/2016 1:10:30 PM PDT by
Chode
(You Owe Them Nothing - Not Respect, Not Loyalty, Not Obedience, NOTHING! ich bin ein Deplorable...)
To: sauropod
>>I question his judgment.
His judgment on this issue has been well-documented in his blog for the past year. His final decision to switch sides is quite momentous.
39 posted on
09/25/2016 1:18:37 PM PDT by
Bryanw92
(If we had some ham, we could have ham and eggs, if we had some eggs.)
To: sauropod
Exactly. Hillary isn’t anything new in the Progressive party.
She isn’t unique, she is exactly like everyone else with the (D) in their name. Same exact person.
She represents her party with 100% precision and accuracy.
40 posted on
09/25/2016 1:22:20 PM PDT by
Celerity
To: sauropod
Did you not read the explanation ... for his safety? Not for a second was he going to vote for her.
46 posted on
09/25/2016 1:29:50 PM PDT by
EDINVA
To: sauropod
I question your judgement because you clearly missed his original endorsement of Hillary as sarcasm. (for my personal safety)
59 posted on
09/25/2016 1:41:31 PM PDT by
Tailback
To: sauropod
I question his judgment. Theres no way any sane person should even consider voting for PIAPS! He never really considered voting for Clinton. His earlier Clinton endorsement was 'tongue in cheek'. Nothing more than comedic entertainment.
61 posted on
09/25/2016 1:42:30 PM PDT by
Windflier
(Pitchforks and torches ripen on the vine. Left too long, they become black rifles.)
To: sauropod
Scott Adams has stated for months he was endorsing Hillary Clinton for his safety, due to threats he received for talking positively about Trump.
71 posted on
09/25/2016 1:50:40 PM PDT by
tbw2
To: sauropod
Well his Hillary endorsement was tongue and cheek ...he said he was doing it out of personal safety reason
80 posted on
09/25/2016 2:07:03 PM PDT by
tophat9000
(King G(OP)eorge III has no idea why the Americans are in rebellion... teach him why)
To: sauropod
Personal safety..... we’ve all seen how unhinged the left gets.
88 posted on
09/25/2016 2:32:07 PM PDT by
AFreeBird
(BEST. ELECTION. EVER!)
To: sauropod
He never said he would vote, let alone vote for her. He had said in earlier posts he would support her to prevent her supporters from harming him. He lives in California, so his vote, like mine, counts for nothing.
90 posted on
09/25/2016 2:48:09 PM PDT by
Go_Raiders
(Freedom doesn't give you the right to take from others, no matter how innocent your program sounds.)
To: sauropod
I question his judgment. Theres no way any sane person should even consider voting for PIAPS!If you've been following him, he's been being sarcastic about that. :)
94 posted on
09/25/2016 3:07:09 PM PDT by
Lazamataz
(MSM ignoring Hillary's health until forced, shows us they are the MPM: Ministry of Propaganda Media)
To: sauropod
Scott’s earlier declaration of voting for h-roids for his own safety may have been one of those ‘acts of persuasion’, implying perhaps that anyone who wants him to vote for h-roids is an effin goon. And thus, it may make such people think twice about what they are doing to him.
103 posted on
09/25/2016 3:40:01 PM PDT by
Vision Thing
(You know the depths of my heart, and You love me the same...)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson