gatomontes99

He's never said he would be dictator. Why donyounkeep repeating that lie?

Innocent people say they didn't do it. Guilty people say you can't prove it.

Nice word salad

If there was no cheating, the democrats wouldn't be mad about stopping cheating.

What more proof do you need that there is a uniparty/blob/deep state...whatever you want to call it...that is pulling all the strings. This is why a Trump/Kenedy/Gabbard coalition is so troubling.

Wow. She really is bad at talking off prompter. Good thing she doesn't wear lace up shoes or her staff would have to help her tie her shoes.

Is it better to be like Republicans and ignore the person and embrace the policies or to be like Democrats and ignore the policies and the person to embrace the image?

Remember when Newsom promised reparations? Oh, he and all of Cali Ds were on board. They loved them some free handouts. Turns out, they didn't want to really do it. Reparations supporters plot comeback after bitter defeat in California Legislature But what they did do is give illegal aliens free money for a home. California lawmakers pass bill that could make undocumented immigrants eligible for home loans That bill was vetoed. But dont think blacks in Cali (and around the country) didn't notice where the D party alliances are.

Why? What did that gain you? Why don't you point to something that I said that indicated my sexual orientation. If we can be realistic, you have no idea if I'm female or male, straight or gay.

I don't do this often, but @CrakHoBarbie is clearly not here to have a reasonable conversation. You are blocked.

So far it is a one way problem. I even gave you an opportunity to drop the act and discuss the problem. If you really wanted to be civil you wouldn't have responded with name calling. But you did and then you asked me to be civil. Why? Why not just start? You could have addressed the issues I brought up. If you want to be civil, go for it. I'm not going to start name calling. As for all these studies you keep throwing up here: In Psychology And Other Social Sciences, Many Studies Fail The Reproducibility Test The reliability of psychological studies was being questioned when I went to school. It was finally studied about a decade ago. The problem with these studies is that they try to isolate and a behavior and a set of circumstances, but the mind is far to complex to isolate to a moment in time. You couldn't do it, could you?

You have a real problem with having civil discussians, don't you? Let's drop the name calling and the fake bravado and just discuss the topic. Let's start with the concept of misinterpretation of arousal: In psychology, misattribution of arousal is the process whereby people make a mistake in assuming what is causing them to feel aroused. For example, when actually experiencing physiological responses related to fear, people mislabel those responses as romantic arousal. The reason physiological symptoms may be attributed to incorrect stimuli is because many stimuli have similar physiological symptoms such as increased blood pressure or shortness of breath. There are numerous reasons why a man will get an erection. Anger, fear, and embarrassment are just a few. Eroticized rage is a fascinating concept. Emotional Triggers: Emotional triggers are stimuli that elicit strong emotional reactions. In the context of eroticized rage, certain emotions, particularly anger, may serve as powerful triggers for sexual arousal. Understanding and managing these triggers is crucial in therapeutic interventions. In other words, if you see something that makes you get angry, you might get an erection. Misinterpretation of arousal explains why a man who hates homosexuality would become erect when subjected to homosexual porn.

Wow. You really are insecure about your thesis. Why is that? FYI, I was talking about the H.E. Adams study.

This study is infamous. It was debunked because it was determined the men that reported homophobic feelings were acutely aware of their erection being monitored. It was the Streisand Effect for erections. Knowing they were being watched, they tried to prevent erection and that caused erection. It was termed misappropriation of erection and stands as a prime example of how a study can be inaccurate. We studied it in Psychology in college. It is a bit troubling that the study remains listed by the government without a note to indicate the study was determined to be inaccurate.

Ah! That makes more sense.

Only 56%?

It is no coincidence that he did this the day after that DOJ Comms guy talked all that sh1t about the case.

You are the one using racist assumptions.

Another Chinese spy in yet another Democrat office. But that's OK, look over here: RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA is paying podcasters to endorse Trump. Except, of those three guys, one was a never Trumper/DeSantis guy, the other didn't hate Trump but spent a lot of time promoting Vivek and the third guy was a liberal. What Chinese spy in the democrats office? Never mind! Hunter pleads guilty! Now Obama and Joe are free from the danger of testifying. Curveball, the DOJ admits their b.s. is b.s. then they take it all back. Oh well, jobs report sucked...again!

Only a racist would call her black. It comes from the racist assumption that if you arent pure white, Asian or whatever, then you must be black. Harris isn't black. She's mixed. Harris isn't Asian. She's mixed. There is nothing wrong with mixed and just because her family tree includes black people doesn't mean she can only be black because she's not pure blood Asian. So please don't fall into these racist traps. Call her mixed. It's honest. It's accurate. It's the right thing to do.

Not only do you seem to illustrate my point perfectly, but you do it by writing about how illiterate I am... while responding to my writings. I mean, that is just classic.

My point wasn't that wages didn't keep up with it. I was taking the very narrow view that inflation is always there when taxes and borrowing are lacking.

Do you really think you can intimidate me? You should understand that when you come on here and start making unfounded claims of misogynistic speech, everyone knows you are admitting defeat and attempting to assert yourself forcefully in a last, desperate attempt to seem authoritative. If you really wanted to impress me, you'd view Harris the way I view Trump. He's a tool. He's a tool that I am using to get some of the things I want out.of the government. Nothing more. He's not my idol. I have no emotional attachment to him. I know he's a womanizing scumbag that wasn't honest in all his real-estate deals. But he gets me things I want like fewer regulations, more equal trade, border security, stronger national defense, equity in international Treaties and so on. You have on the rose colored glasses with Harris. If you didn't, you'd see her for her lack of intelligence with regards to the economy and foreign affairs and how she's wrong about so many social issues.

I'm just calling you out for your wacky conspiracy theories.