SURVEY: Who do you believe would be the best president for the US?

[NovaBlue05]

Surprised LBJ only increased it by 13% while increasing troop levels by over 1/2 a million.

[chuckd]

I just crunched some numbers re; US presidents since 1963. It's become fashionable for Obama bashers to claim he was the worst Federal Budget raiser of all time. Below are some numbers which should help disabuse the bashers' misconception:

D: Barack Obama: Added $6.463 trillion, a 55.4% increase..

R: George W. Bush: Added $5.849 trillion, a 101% increase.

D: Bill Clinton: Added $1.396 trillion, a 32% increase.

R: George H.W. Bush: Added $1.554 trillion, a 54% increase.

R: Ronald Reagan: Added $1.86 trillion, 186% increase.

D: Jimmy Carter: Added $299 billion, a 43% increase.

R: Gerald Ford: Added $224 billion, a 47% increase.

R: Richard Nixon: Added $121 billion, a 34% increase.

D: Lyndon B. Johnson: Added $42 billion, a 13% increase.

D: John F. Kennedy: Added $23 billion, an 8% increase.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Democrat Presidents since '63 increased budgets an average of 30.3%

Republican Presidents increased budgets an average of 84.4%

If I became president, I would reduce government spending and increase taxes on the very wealthy, to yield a surplus. Unfortunately, I could never be prez because, like Arnie Swarzenegger, I wasn't born in the USA.

Note, Reagan had the highest % of increase and he is the Republican's darling. He's the 'gold standard' that all Rep candidates, for any political office since, have been compared to. Reagan's 186% increase in overspending was during a time when the US was not conducting a war, unless you count the Contra war against the Sandanistas which Reagan was clandestinely fueling - which was against the law and contrary to congress.

You have completely ignored what I said in an earlier post about the percent of increase. In case you missed it, here it is again...

"It should also be pointed out the percent of increase means nothing since each administration starts with an ever increasing base figure. Bush started with a much lower base amount. Even though he added some $2 Trillion less that Obama is destined to add, his percent of increase will always be higher, even though the increase is less, dollar wise."

If this is too difficult for you to comprehend, let me make it even easier.

According to the link where you are getting your information, and still refusing to credit, this is what it says about two Presidents as it relates to your ridiculous statement about President Reagan. From your still unattributed link:

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Ronald Reagan added $1.86 Trillion to the national debt in the eight years of his Presidency.

This represents a 186% increase of the national debt which was $998 Billion when he took office.

2. Barack Obama added $1.619 Trillion to the national debt in fiscal year 2010 and another $1.235 Trillion in fiscal year 2011.

His total of the first two years comes to $2.854 Trillion, $1 Trillion more in one year than the eight year total of Reagan. Yet since the starting point of the national debt was $11.657 Trillion when Obama took office, that two year increase of $2,854 Trillion represents only an increase of 24.48% even though it was $1 Trillion more than Reagan's eight year total.

Let's take this just a little farther and say they both started with a national debt that was only $998 Billion.

Reagan's percent of national debt increase would still be 186%.

Obama's percent of national debt increase for his first TWO years only would be...286.0%

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As I said earlier, percent of increase means nothing in this case. As usual, nothing is what you have.

The link: http://useconomy.about.com/od/usdebtanddeficit/p/US-Debt-by-President.htm

[boomerangutang]

Percent of increase means percent of increase. Percent means percent, it doesn't mean gross dollar amount. The percentages in the list are percentage increase from the prior president's budget. If you don't like the numbers because they offend you're partisan leanings, well, that's too bad.

Chuckd: "Let's take this just a little farther and say they both started with a national debt that was only $998 Billion. Reagan's percent of national debt increase would still be 186%."

You can run hypothetical numbers all around the block, but I was quoting numbers taken from a reliable web site which had taken the tallies from the US Government (Accounting Office?).

Of course earlier administrations had smaller comparative budgets. John Adams' may have been in the 10's of thousands. The list addresses % change from administration to administration, not dollar amounts, and certainly not dollar amounts from administrations far removed.

There was property along the California sea coast that was selling for 50 cents an acre, 110 years ago, but that's not the issue here.

[chuckd]

Percent of increase means percent of increase. Percent means percent, it doesn't mean gross dollar amount. The percentages in the list are percentage increase from the prior president's budget. If you don't like the numbers because they offend you're partisan leanings, well, that's too bad.

Chuckd: "Let's take this just a little farther and say they both started with a national debt that was only $998 Billion. Reagan's percent of national debt increase would still be 186%."

You can run hypothetical numbers all around the block, but I was quoting numbers taken from a reliable web site which had taken the tallies from the US Government (Accounting Office?).

Of course earlier administrations had smaller comparative budgets. John Adams' may have been in the 10's of thousands. The list addresses % change from administration to administration, not dollar amounts, and certainly not dollar amounts from administrations far removed.

There was property along the California sea coast that was selling for 50 cents an acre, 110 years ago, but that's not the issue here.

"Percent of increase means percent of increase. Percent means percent, it doesn't mean gross dollar amount. The percentages in the list are percentage increase from the prior president's budget.'

Now I understand the problem. You simply don't understand what you have been posting.

In the first place, Reagan's numbers were not hypothetical. They were actuals.

The percentages you have been quoting have absolutely NOTHING to do with the prior President's budget other than an incoming President generally operates under a first year budget passed by the previous administration. This is because the government works on a fiscal year basis and not a calendar year basis.

The percentages you have been quoting relate to the net increase in the US national debt each President inherited at the beginning of their Presidency to the amount that each of them increased the national debt during their time in office.

Keeping it as simple as possible, let's look at your favorite Ronald Reagan.

When Reagan assumed the office he inherited a first year budget from Carter, which ended with a national debt totaling $998 Billion.

When Reagan left office he left a first year budget for Bush 1 which then resulted in a national debt of $2.8 Trillion, which Bush 1 inherited.

Now if you take the $998 Billion that Reagan inherited and deduct it from the $2.8 Trillion that Bush 1 inherited, you have the net amount that Reagan increased the national debt, or $1.86 Trillion.

Voila! An increase of 186%.

PS:

The only President in recent history that did not inherit a budget from his predecessor was everybody's friend, Barack Obama.

You see, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi had control of Congress during the last two years of the Bush administration. Since they knew a Democrat (Obama) was coming in, they failed to pass a budget during Bush's last year, running the government on continuing resolutions.

After Obama was installed into the Oval Office, Congress then passed the Stimulus Bill and increased the Bush budget expenditures by an amount of $411 Billion.

[Ulysses G.]

You can run hypothetical numbers all around the block, but I was quoting numbers taken from a reliable web site which had taken the tallies from the US Government (Accounting Office?).

Face it. chuckd is right and you are WRONG. Better quit digging that hole.

Edited March 16, 2016 by Ulysses G.

[Scott]

A post with the comment inside the quote box has been removed along with replies.

[HLover]

(eating popcorn) This is funny.

[Publicus]

you are not convincing anyone that has actually studied the case.

What case...there aren't any charges, no prosecutor, no grand jury, no injured party, no docket number, no case number...no nuthin. Who anyway seems to think he's the only one to have "actually studied the case."

It would be interesting to do a Thai Visa poll; Do you think Hillary Clinton has violated the law concerning her emails?

I wonder how many members are actually convinced by you spamming the forum everyday with nonsensical spin.

Quit begging.

Youse guyz get all the topics on it you could wish for and then some.

It's the same MSM that keep producing the stories but it's the well funded mass of highly financed rightwhinge media that keep this going.

It comes from leaks in the superpatriot right wing intelligence bureaucracy that won't respond to FOIA requests to reveal their IG's contacts with Republican senators, Charles Grassley of Iowa especially and in particular.

No one in the election campaign is more qualified to be Potus than is Hillary Rodham Clinton. She is both indefatigable and unstoppable.

There is no prosecutor, no grand jury, no charges, no nuthin. Only rightwhingenuts on the loose.

[Publicus]

I just crunched some numbers re; US presidents since 1963. It's become fashionable for Obama bashers to claim he was the worst Federal Budget raiser of all time. Below are some numbers which should help disabuse the bashers' misconception:

D: Barack Obama: Added $6.463 trillion, a 55.4% increase..

R: George W. Bush: Added $5.849 trillion, a 101% increase.

D: Bill Clinton: Added $1.396 trillion, a 32% increase.

R: George H.W. Bush: Added $1.554 trillion, a 54% increase.

R: Ronald Reagan: Added $1.86 trillion, 186% increase.

D: Jimmy Carter: Added $299 billion, a 43% increase.

R: Gerald Ford: Added $224 billion, a 47% increase.

R: Richard Nixon: Added $121 billion, a 34% increase.

D: Lyndon B. Johnson: Added $42 billion, a 13% increase.

D: John F. Kennedy: Added $23 billion, an 8% increase.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Democrat Presidents since '63 increased budgets an average of 30.3%

Republican Presidents increased budgets an average of 84.4%

If I became president, I would reduce government spending and increase taxes on the very wealthy, to yield a surplus. Unfortunately, I could never be prez because, like Arnie Swarzenegger, I wasn't born in the USA.

I crunched some numbers as well and then found the exact same thing you posted at this site:

http://useconomy.about.com/od/usdebtanddeficit/p/US-Debt-by-President.htm

I notice you also failed to mention that George W. Bush's national debt increase of $5.489 Trillion was over an eight year administration.

Barack Obama's increase in the amount of $6.463 Trillion has been accomplished in just six years.

His 2016 budget calls for an estimated deficit of $474 Billion and his 2017 budget request will very likely add a similar amount for the 2017 FY.

Assuming these last two years will add another $950 Billion to the debt, that would raise Obama's total national debt increase to the rather kingly sum of $7.413 Trillion, a 63.6% increase.

It should also be pointed out the percent of increase means nothing since each administration starts with an ever increasing base figure. Bush started with a much lower base amount. Even though he added some $2 Trillion less that Obama is destined to add, his percent of increase will always be higher, even though the increase is less, dollar wise.

This is the way to attribute an article or information gleaned from it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_United_States_federal_budget

https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget

$19 Trillion national debt and rising.

Here is something to keep on your desktop to keep track of how much you owe in real time.

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

Now we know how the far right passes time. Secrets revealed and we heard it here first.

Try a desktop photo. Something that has people in it.

We've been over this national debt thing many times...so many times.

Yet the far out right keeps feeding their debt ulcers.

[Linzz]

I just crunched some numbers re; US presidents since 1963. It's become fashionable for Obama bashers to claim he was the worst Federal Budget raiser of all time. Below are some numbers which should help disabuse the bashers' misconception:

D: Barack Obama: Added $6.463 trillion, a 55.4% increase..

R: George W. Bush: Added $5.849 trillion, a 101% increase.

D: Bill Clinton: Added $1.396 trillion, a 32% increase.

R: George H.W. Bush: Added $1.554 trillion, a 54% increase.

R: Ronald Reagan: Added $1.86 trillion, 186% increase.

D: Jimmy Carter: Added $299 billion, a 43% increase.

R: Gerald Ford: Added $224 billion, a 47% increase.

R: Richard Nixon: Added $121 billion, a 34% increase.

D: Lyndon B. Johnson: Added $42 billion, a 13% increase.

D: John F. Kennedy: Added $23 billion, an 8% increase.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Democrat Presidents since '63 increased budgets an average of 30.3%

Republican Presidents increased budgets an average of 84.4%

If I became president, I would reduce government spending and increase taxes on the very wealthy, to yield a surplus. Unfortunately, I could never be prez because, like Arnie Swarzenegger, I wasn't born in the USA.

I crunched some numbers as well and then found the exact same thing you posted at this site:

http://useconomy.about.com/od/usdebtanddeficit/p/US-Debt-by-President.htm

I notice you also failed to mention that George W. Bush's national debt increase of $5.489 Trillion was over an eight year administration.

Barack Obama's increase in the amount of $6.463 Trillion has been accomplished in just six years.

His 2016 budget calls for an estimated deficit of $474 Billion and his 2017 budget request will very likely add a similar amount for the 2017 FY.

Assuming these last two years will add another $950 Billion to the debt, that would raise Obama's total national debt increase to the rather kingly sum of $7.413 Trillion, a 63.6% increase.

It should also be pointed out the percent of increase means nothing since each administration starts with an ever increasing base figure. Bush started with a much lower base amount. Even though he added some $2 Trillion less that Obama is destined to add, his percent of increase will always be higher, even though the increase is less, dollar wise.

This is the way to attribute an article or information gleaned from it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_United_States_federal_budget

https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget

$19 Trillion national debt and rising.

Here is something to keep on your desktop to keep track of how much you owe in real time.

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

Now we know how the far right passes time. Secrets revealed and we heard it here first.

Try a desktop photo. Something that has people in it.

We've been over this national debt thing many times...so many times.

Yet the far out right keeps feeding their debt ulcers.

Don't let reality ruin your day! Ostrich and sand spring to mind. The national debt reminder is of no consequence to the rose tints who believe that screwing the mugs for more taxes will solve a looming debt crisis.

Edit: An additional billion since yesterday's post

Edited March 16, 2016 by Linzz

[neverdie]

Sorry Scott, it appears to me that there is NO OPTION.

The USA would be better off with no leader than any of these turkeys.

[Publicus]

$19 Trillion national debt and rising.

Here is something to keep on your desktop to keep track of how much you owe in real time.

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

Now we know how the far right passes time. Secrets revealed and we heard it here first.

Try a desktop photo. Something that has people in it.

We've been over this national debt thing many times...so many times.

Yet the far out right keeps feeding their debt ulcers.

Don't let reality ruin your day! Ostrich and sand spring to mind. The national debt reminder is of no consequence to the rose tints who believe that screwing the mugs for more taxes will solve a looming debt crisis.

Edit: An additional billion since yesterday's post

This is a rightwhinge issue forever no matter what, despite the fact the extreme right's misperceptions about debt are....never mind cause it just goes on...and on...

If the fringe right led most recently by Donald Trump weren't feeding its ulcers over debt it would be something else such as stopping Hillary Clinton becoming Potus at all costs and in any way no matter what. Oops, that's just what's happening anyway, isn't it.

Yes and much more to save the nation about. The right is certain only it can do that, as if the country needed salvation, never mind from that corner of the society and Donald Trump especially.

So...

Whinge on.

As always.

[NovaBlue05]

Sorry Scott, it appears to me that there is NO OPTION.

The USA would be better off with no leader than any of these turkeys.

Tried that

[Linzz]

$19 Trillion national debt and rising.

Here is something to keep on your desktop to keep track of how much you owe in real time.

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

Now we know how the far right passes time. Secrets revealed and we heard it here first.

Try a desktop photo. Something that has people in it.

We've been over this national debt thing many times...so many times.

Yet the far out right keeps feeding their debt ulcers.

Don't let reality ruin your day! Ostrich and sand spring to mind. The national debt reminder is of no consequence to the rose tints who believe that screwing the mugs for more taxes will solve a looming debt crisis.

Edit: An additional billion since yesterday's post

This is a rightwhinge issue forever no matter what, despite the fact the extreme right's misperceptions about debt are....never mind cause it just goes on...and on...

If the fringe right led most recently by Donald Trump weren't feeding its ulcers over debt it would be something else such as stopping Hillary Clinton becoming Potus at all costs and in any way no matter what. Oops, that's just what's happening anyway, isn't it.

Yes and much more to save the nation about. The right is certain only it can do that, as if the country needed salvation, never mind from that corner of the society and Donald Trump especially.

So...

Whinge on.

As always.

Pub you are rude and arrogant as always which causes you to be incredibly blind but that's your choice I guess. If it's a rightwing issue only, to consider the economy and the debt crisis then the left wing such as you exemplify must be in la la land. You dismiss it as a non issue or only as a means of getting at Hillary which again trivializes it. I really couldn't care who is potus if this issue is addressed because what affects the US will affect every other nation. I've never really heard Donald Trump's economic analysis, if he has talked on it at all then I've missed it, but I heard Bernie Sanders talk about making Wall Street pay for it which suits me fine at this point in time Even you must do simple housekeeping otherwise you would be broke. Your damning people for being rightwinge or whatever you enjoy doing is really quite tedious and pretty childish to be honest. I try to seriously read your posts but you lose credibility because you only want to address those who agree with you, damn the rest and no doubt count up your likes. I've learnt from you a little about American politics and can only say I find it mostly distasteful.

[Scott]

Off-topic, inflammatory and baiting posts and replies removed.

[Basil B]

Trump presidency rated among top 10 global risks: EIU

Donald Trump winning the US presidency is considered one of the top 10 risks facing the world, according to the Economist Intelligence Unit.

The research firm warns he could disrupt the global economy and heighten political and security risks in the US.

However, it does not expect Mr Trump to defeat Hillary Clinton who it sees as "his most likely Democratic contender".

-- BBC http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-35828747

[Publicus]

I just crunched some numbers re; US presidents since 1963. It's become fashionable for Obama bashers to claim he was the worst Federal Budget raiser of all time. Below are some numbers which should help disabuse the bashers' misconception:

D: Barack Obama: Added $6.463 trillion, a 55.4% increase..

R: George W. Bush: Added $5.849 trillion, a 101% increase.

D: Bill Clinton: Added $1.396 trillion, a 32% increase.

R: George H.W. Bush: Added $1.554 trillion, a 54% increase.

R: Ronald Reagan: Added $1.86 trillion, 186% increase.

D: Jimmy Carter: Added $299 billion, a 43% increase.

R: Gerald Ford: Added $224 billion, a 47% increase.

R: Richard Nixon: Added $121 billion, a 34% increase.

D: Lyndon B. Johnson: Added $42 billion, a 13% increase.

D: John F. Kennedy: Added $23 billion, an 8% increase.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Democrat Presidents since '63 increased budgets an average of 30.3%

Republican Presidents increased budgets an average of 84.4%

If I became president, I would reduce government spending and increase taxes on the very wealthy, to yield a surplus. Unfortunately, I could never be prez because, like Arnie Swarzenegger, I wasn't born in the USA.

I crunched some numbers as well and then found the exact same thing you posted at this site:

http://useconomy.about.com/od/usdebtanddeficit/p/US-Debt-by-President.htm

I notice you also failed to mention that George W. Bush's national debt increase of $5.489 Trillion was over an eight year administration.

Barack Obama's increase in the amount of $6.463 Trillion has been accomplished in just six years.

His 2016 budget calls for an estimated deficit of $474 Billion and his 2017 budget request will very likely add a similar amount for the 2017 FY.

Assuming these last two years will add another $950 Billion to the debt, that would raise Obama's total national debt increase to the rather kingly sum of $7.413 Trillion, a 63.6% increase.

It should also be pointed out the percent of increase means nothing since each administration starts with an ever increasing base figure. Bush started with a much lower base amount. Even though he added some $2 Trillion less that Obama is destined to add, his percent of increase will always be higher, even though the increase is less, dollar wise.

This is the way to attribute an article or information gleaned from it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_United_States_federal_budget

https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget

Thanks Chuckd for straightening that out. You are one of the few posters on here that sticks to honest statistics and other information. Thanks for correcting other's spin.

Smoooooch!

The right has always had the habit of self-reinforcement well beyond simply liking one another's product. However, the rate of congenital backpatting since the loose radical Trump emerged has shot up significantly.

The beat goes on.

Or as someone once said to Dick Clark, the tune is flat and the lyrics are boring.

[Publicus]

It's a tossup as to which is of a greater scientific significance, examination of the brain of Donald Trump or the brain of the rightwing zealot.

We should find out if there is in fact a difference.

Trump’s Brain and U.S. Foreign Policy

For weeks, journalists have been asking Donald Trump, the Republican frontrunner for president, to name his foreign policy brain trust

Now, we have a more definitive answer and it’s horrifying: “I’m speaking with myself, number one, because I have a very good brain,” he said on Wednesday, also on “Morning Joe.”

“My primary consultant is myself and I have a good instinct for this stuff,” he added.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/blogs/takingnote/2016/03/16/trumps-brain-and-u-s-foreign-policy/

His brain's gonna end up like Ben Carson's at this rate Let’s Order Chinese Food And Watch Donald Trump’s Brain Essplode

Read more at http://wonkette.com/595927/lets-order-chinese-food-and-watch-donald-trumps-brain-essplode#rEQ83vjtK189TSYg.99

The Merriam Webster (online) dictionary...

“Regress” is defined as

: movement backward to a previous and especially worse or more primitive state or condition

: the act of reasoning backward

"Regress." Merriam-Webster.com. Merriam-Webster, n.d. Web. 13 Feb. 2016.

In "The Republican Party that WAS," Byron Goines addresses the topic of the ideological history of the Republican Party, and how it has changed from progressive to regressive

"The Republican Party has changed to a regressive party from its historical roots as a progressive party. Between the two political parties, the 21st Century Republican Party is regressive and the 21st Century Democratic Party is progressive. Do you want progressive party members or regressive party members in the office of President of the United States and in both houses of Congress?"

https://www.byronmeshellegoines.com/the-republican-party-that-was.aspx

The Republican party has gone from Abraham Lincoln and Theodore Roosevelt to George Bush and Donald Trump. Youbetcha Sarah Palin! And God Bless America says Mike Huckabee who sprung Kim Davis from jail in Kentucky.

KY Criminal Record Online - Search Criminals In Kentucky.

https://www.instantcheckmate.com/?

[Chicog]

In response one of his talking heads was on Fox announcing vociferously - as if we are all supposed to bow down in wonder - that Jeff Sessions will head up his Foreign Policy Advisory Committee.

He sounds like a Trump man alright:

At Sessions' confirmation hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee, four Department of Justice lawyers who had worked with Sessions testified that he had made several racist statements. One of those lawyers, J. Gerald Hebert, testified that Sessions had referred to the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) as "un-American" and "Communist-inspired" because they "forced civil rights down the throats of people."

Thomas Figures, a black Assistant U.S. Attorney, testified that Sessions said he thought the Klan was "OK until I found out they smoked pot." Sessions later said that the comment was not serious, but apologized for it.

Edited March 17, 2016 by Chicog

[Grouse]

Print more money

The USA can do that quite easily

Next.......

[tukkytuktuk]

John Kasich due to his commitment on climate change.

[Publicus]

Trump's brain is going to do the United States so very well throughout the world and in the developing world which is primarily a world of diverse colors, of varying ethnicity, religions and the like...

Recall 1986 when Reagan's failed nomination of the nutcase Robert Borked hadn't been enough of a hard lesson, Reagan nominated the racist Sessions for a US District Court judgeship in Alabama, also unsuccessfully...also disastrously.


Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III, rejected for judgeship for racist views

"I may have said something about the NAACP being un-American or communist, but I meant no harm by it." Jeff Sessions testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee, discussing his racial attitudes, 1986.

Groveling in the US Senate and before the vast mainstream of the people of the United States did the racist wannabe federal judge Sessions no good. So Alabamans proceded to elect Sessions to the United States Senate.

Nor did it help Sessions when he admitted to routinely referring to an African-American attorney who worked for him as "boy" -- even once warning that attorney to "be careful what you say to white folks!"

And it wasn't just talk, either.

Sessions, it was disclosed, had a disturbing record of indicting black civil rights activists as US Attorney in Mobile, Alabama. Invariably the cases were later dismissed. He was also accused of not investigating the spate of black church burnings that swept the state of Alabama the year he became attorney general.

https://ballotpedia.org/Jeff_Sessions

Jeff Sessions AKA Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III
Born: 24-Dec-1946
Birthplace: Hybart, AL
Gender: Male
Religion: Methodist
Race or Ethnicity: White
Sexual orientation: Straight
Occupation: Politician
Party Affiliation: Republican

Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III was (obviously) named for his father and grandfather. His grandfather was named for Jefferson Davis, President of the Confederacy, and General Pierre Gustave Toutant Beauregard, the superintendent of West Point who quit to take command the 1st Confederate Army Group [attacking] Fort Sumter, South Carolina, at the start of the American Civil War [firing the first shot of the War, against the Union Army island installation in the Charleston harbor].

http://www.nndb.com/people/295/000032199/

2016 enter David Duke and the KKK.

Trump's Brain.

Edited March 17, 2016 by Publicus

[stander]

Rick Astley

[HLover]

Alfred E Neuman, he fits in perfect for that circus show.