President Trump’s iPhone has only one third-party app: Twitter

“Top White House officials tell me the key to forcing a more disciplined President Trump (like the one onstage overseas) is limiting his screen time,” Mike Allen reports for Axios.

 
“In Trump’s case,” Allen reports, “it’s curtailing his time watching TV and banging out tweets on his iPhone.”

 
Allen reports, “POTUS’ current device is an iPhone with ONE app: Twitter.”

 
Read more in the full article here.

 

MacDailyNews Take: Of course, iPhones comes with a number of built-in, necessary Apple apps, so Twitter would be the one third-party app on President Trump’s iPhone.

 
SEE ALSO:
Jeb Bush confirmed Apple Watch user – May 14, 2015
Republican candidate Mitt Romney confirmed Apple iPad user (with video) – March 19, 2012
U.S. President Obama confirmed Apple iPad owner (with photo) – April 25, 2011
U.S. President Obama confirmed Apple iPad owner – March 28, 2011
Confirmed: Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter is an Apple iPod and iPad user – December 14, 2010
Former U.S. President George W. Bush’s favorite iPad app – October 28, 2010
U.S. President Obama conducts demo on Apple MacBook Pro (with video) – July 29, 2010
Confirmed: Barack Obama is an Apple iPod user – December 05, 2008
President Bush tours Walter Reed, says he appreciates that soldiers have Apple Macs – March 30, 2007
President Bush shows off his Apple iPod (link to video) – December 16, 2005
U.S. President George Bush a confirmed Apple iPod user (images included) – December 22, 2004

80 Comments

  1. We elected a non-politician for a reason, and the establishment’s big complaint ——other than that they didn’t get to install another statist globalist “first” (in this case, a woman) into the White House, so that whenever their failed policies were criticized they could cry “sexism” (as they did with “racism” with the last loser) —— is that he doesn’t act like a politician.

    The mainstream media is broken and has, along with career politicians, become a terrible drag on America and a barrier to fixing what desperately needs to be fixed.

    If you have run up a $20 trillion national debt, yes, you have to cut spending. Raising taxes will only kill the economy. You’ll bring in less tax revenue. You need to cut taxes to increase revenue over the long haul while also getting a handle on entitlements and reforming the crippling entitlement mentality the U.S. (and Europe, for that matter) that is killing budgets and killing spirits.

    http://www.usdebtclock.org

    Government is not your mommy.

    It is a paradoxical truth that tax rates are too high and tax revenues are too low and the soundest way to raise the revenues in the long run is to cut the rates now … Cutting taxes now is not to incur a budget deficit, but to achieve the more prosperous, expanding economy which can bring a budget surplus. – John F. Kennedy, Nov. 20, 1962

    Lower rates of taxation will stimulate economic activity and so raise the levels of personal and corporate income as to yield within a few years an increased – not a reduced – flow of revenues to the federal government. – John F. Kennedy, Jan. 17, 1963

    It is no contradiction – the most important single thing we can do to stimulate investment in today’s economy is to raise consumption by major reduction of individual income tax rates. – John F. Kennedy, Jan. 21, 1963

    Our tax system still siphons out of the private economy too large a share of personal and business purchasing power and reduces the incentive for risk, investment and effort – thereby aborting our recoveries and stifling our national growth rate. – John F. Kennedy, Jan. 24, 1963

    A tax cut means higher family income and higher business profits and a balanced federal budget. Every taxpayer and his family will have more money left over after taxes for a new car, a new home, new conveniences, education and investment. Every businessman can keep a higher percentage of his profits in his cash register or put it to work expanding or improving his business, and as the national income grows, the federal government will ultimately end up with more revenues – John F. Kennedy, Sept. 18, 1963

    In 1983, when the Reagan policies of reducing taxes, spending, regulation, and inflation were in place, the result was unprecedented economic growth. This economic boom lasted 92 months without a recession, from November 1982 to July 1990, the longest period of sustained growth during peacetime and the second-longest period of sustained growth in U.S. history. The growth in the economy lasted more than twice as long as the average period of expansions since World War II.

    1. Debt at the end of Carter’s last budget
      $ 997,855,000,000.00
      Debt at the end of Reagan’s last budget (almost tripled the debt)
      $ 2,857,430,960,187.32
      Debt at the end of Bush I’s last budget (close to doubled the debt)
      $ 4,411,488,883,139.38
      Debt at the end of Clinton’s last budget (increased by less than 1/3rd)
      $ 5,807,463,412,200.06
      End of Dubya’s last budget (over doubled)
      $11,909,829,003,511.75
      End of Obama’s next to last budget- we are still on his last year until Sept 30. (less than doubled)
      18,150,617,666,484.33

      Notice a trend- the debt increases more under Republican Presidents. Clinton balanced budgets, Obama reduced deficits every year after the first through 8 years. Republicans bitch incessantly about debt except when they are in charge. BTW- Trump’s proposals would explode the debt.

      Finally, the stock market does better under Democrats than Republicans.
      DJIA Inauguration Day 2009
      7,949.09
      DJIA Inauguration Day 2017
      19,732.40

      Republicans claim to be better at Economics, Budgets, Defense and Foreign Policy.

      Republicans cannot balance a budget.

      9-11 happened on their watch.

      NAFTA, CAFTA, KFTA and others were passed largely with Republican Congressional support and Democratic opposition.

      The Bush 1 Administration missed the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the collapse of the Warsaw Pact and Saddam’s invasion of Kuwait.

      TrumpleThinSkin is still writing his narrative if he can stay in office and out of jail.

        1. There are Democratic Congresses, but not Democrat Congresses, just like we do not have Republic Congresses.

          The spending comes from the President- not the Congress. The executive can not spend appropriated money and return it to the Treasury. So do not fly that shit.

            1. “The spending comes from the President- not the Congress.”

              PS: All spending bills emanate from the House…by Constitutional law.

              U.S. Constitution – Article 1 Section 7

              “All bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.”

              https://www.usconstitution.net/xconst_A1Sec7.html

              PPS: You’re an idiot.

            2. Re botvinnik:
              Yes, the House appropriates money, but the executive spends it. The President can impound any appropriated funds he sees fit and return them unspent to the Treasury and further can delegate that authority to those under him/her.

              I never said the appropriation comes from the President- I said spending. and, BTW your Quote governs taxes “raising Revenue”- not spending. Learn how to fucking read.

            3. Well you read it wrong.
              The Congress- starting in the House -Appropriates money and the Executive spends it. The Checks are signed by or bear the imprint of the signature of the Secretary of the Treasury, who is appointed by and serves at the pleasure of the President.

              You need to slow down and read. Move your lips if you must, being a Republican.

          1. We have:

            The Presidency.
            The Senate.
            The House.
            The Supreme Court.
            37 Governorships.
            Almost all State legislatures.

            You have:
            Saturday Night Live
            Stephen Colbert
            Meryl Streep
            Pocahontas
            CNN
            Cher

            1. And somehow, with all this political power, the world is still riddled with terrorists blowing up people, nuclear weapons being tested by rogue states, increasing poverty and inequality, massively increasing debt…

              So what are you so proud of, exactly?

            2. I took a screenshot of your statement, botty, and when 45 is taken to jail I promise that I will post it after ever post you make on MDN. #guaranteed.

            3. awwww…whole lotta poopy faces this morning in The Plantation Party. Them there dang ol’ Rooskies up there in Billings…gotta stop ’em!

              bwahahahahahahaha

            4. Spectacular summation!

              It is unbelievable how far and out of touch the Democrats have FALLEN. All one needs to do is read all the great quotes Firsty posted from JFK.

              Today JFK would be a Republican.

              Down vote mass outrage in 3… 2… 1… 🤓

            5. David: The ‘We have’ list is in the process of flipping back again in the other direction, for obvious reasons.

              The sad part is that the ‘You’ in ‘You have’ is just as worthless a political party as the ‘We have’ party. Both are corrupt, stupid, lazy, corporatocratic, puppeted, owned, lunatic, and do NOT represent We The People of the USA. I for one look only to third parties to provide real representation and what’s good for the future of my country.

              (My usual rant).

            6. Flipping back? I guess you missed the Montana election results.

              The exact opposite can be said as a result of a solid win in Montana. The Republican majority is growing ….

            7. No, I saw the Montana election results. A thug versus a musician. Montana prefers a thug. At least the thug apologized. Much as I like musicians, I can seen the point in not voting one into the House. Stupid DemoCraps. A very naff choice IMHO.

        2. Sarah, where have you been the last 6 years? All those big republican ideas, complete ownership of Congress, and still no reforms were passed. NONE. Explain why you blame the Democrats for this.

            1. So what you are saying is that your party (I am firmly independent, by the way) was unable to come up with any proposals that would improve America that President Obama would agree to, and therefore didn’t even try to submit any meaningful legislation. Got it.

              As I said, partisanship leaves America worse off because bickering babies can’t even begin to collaborate or compromise in the middle. What a sad state of what used to be a pretty decent governmental system.

            2. botvinnik hasn’t ever written an accurate thing that I’ve read.

              Total waste of time. Who wants to read the deranged revings of an alt right political looney?

            3. “botvinnik hasn’t ever written an accurate thing that I’ve read.”

              What a dishonest statement. Typical, more from the lying left.

              “Total waste of time. Who wants to read the deranged revings of an alt right political looney?”

              You just did! Then worse, you replied and wrote about it! Believe that has a lot to do with hyprocisy. I guess it would useless to mention ranks as one of the dumbest replies, sheesh …

      1. I said, that we elected a non-politician for a reason, and the establishment’s big complaint ——other than that they didn’t get to install another statist globalist “first” (in this case, a woman) into the White House, so that whenever their failed policies were criticized they could cry “sexism” (as they did with “racism” with the last loser) —— is that he doesn’t act like a politician.

        The mainstream media is broken and has, along with career politicians, become a terrible drag on America and a barrier to fixing what desperately needs to be fixed.

        You want to go off topic because you can’t rebut the truth? Okay, let’s go off topic.

        This is the Democrat Party, the party of absolute soulless monsters:

        “An eyeball just fell down into my lap, and that is gross!” [laughter from the crowd of assembled Democrats]

        Despicable vermin.

      2. Using your numbers: From Carter to Reagan the national debt increased about two trillion dollars.

        From Bush to Obama the national debt increased over six trillion dollars. A new record for all presidents going back to George Washington.

        And you’re more interested in playing with baseball terms of doubles and triples which are meaningless. If the debt was one dollar and the next year two dollars that is a 100% increase (doubled). In the end, numbers matter, not politically charged headline grabbing multiplier games.

        Your hatred for anything Republican is duly noted. 911 on Bush’s watch. What the hell are you implying!?!

        Did you forget all the tragedies on Obama’s watch? And I’m not blaming either president.

        The problem with SELECTIVE OUTRAGE from a skewed political perspective is the playing field is NOT LEVEL.

        You should remember that … 🇺🇸

        1. First , I am not a Democrat. In 1980 I worked to elect Reagan, FYI.

          In terms of percentage no President has exploded the debt like Reagan and it was discretionary spending. He combined ill advised Tax Cuts with massive spending on Defense. The jump in economic activity was a combination of a normal cyclical recovery with the stimulus of his massive Defense buildup.

          The bulk of the deficits under Obama- whom I did NOT vote for- were driven by entitlements. Some spending is programmed in regardless of who is in the White House as long as those programs exist. Obama’s OMB sharply reduced the deficit each succeeding year over his Presidency.

          It has been said that figures do not lie, but liars figure. The simple Truth is few living have seen a Republican President balance a budget despite all the bitching about it from Republicans, but Clinton- a nominal Democrat- did it repeatedly. Had Dubya and the Republican Congress left things alone all outstanding debt would have been retired by now.

          1. DG, your selective revisionist history of Reagan, budgets, taxes et al. comes from a Democrat perspective. While I would enjoy a good exchange, just not right now, stay tuned.

            Come to think of it, regardless of your independent party, all your political posts are the same. Democrats 100% good, Republicans 100% bad. Not a accurate reflection of politics.

            Enjoy the unofficial start to summer …

          2. Just one indulgence.

            “Had Dubya and the Republican Congress left things alone all outstanding debt would have been retired by now.”

            No way. The national debt has been in place since 1969. It existed during the Clinton years and every president since Nixon. Noticed you did the mention the Obama stimulus package (unions) and agree he increased entitlement spending (TWO voter registration drives).

            Obama would have ballooned the national debt, the Great Democrat Society, no matter what was done under Dubya or anyone else before him … IMHO

            1. Federal debt existed before Nixon as did deficits.

              Again- there is no “Democrat” Great Society. It was a policy of the Democratic Party. Tell your boy Rush (HS Grad, BTW) there is no Democrat Party in the US, but there is a Democratic Party.

            2. “Federal debt existed before Nixon as did deficits.”

              That’s not what I posted and I’m fully aware of federal funding for centuries. I believe that is called a not so artful dodge.

              Are you so partisan blind to post such wild speculation about Dubya. Political fantasy projection is reality in your head?

              I would think about that and could not care less about Rush. I can think for myself, thank you very much …

    2. One comparison that struck me from the Congressional Budget Office analysis of TrumpCare as passed by the House:

      Estimated ObamaCare annual health insurance premiums for a poor man aged 64 with mandatory coverage and maximum government aid—
      $1700

      Estimated TrumpCare annual premiums for the same person with mandatory coverage and maximum government aid (but without extra-cost coverage for preexisting conditions, mental health, substance abuse, lifetime caps, etc.)—
      $17,000

      This addresses only premium cost. Because TrumpCare is aimed primarily at lowering premiums for healthy young male adults, it is expected that coinsurance, co-pays, deductibles, benefit caps and other out-of-pocket expenses will be significantly more costly for patients who actually require health care during the year.

      Because TrumpCare government aid is based solely on age and not ability to pay, a wealthy 64-year-old will pay the same $17,000 (about 67% more than he currently pays), because ObamaCare limits age-based extra premiums to 3X the base rate while TrumpCare allows 5X.

      To be fair, wealthy individuals will pay fewer taxes because of changes targeting mostly families making more than $200,000/year.

      Yes, a true man of the people.

        1. I did mention it, actually: “TrumpCare as passed by the House.” If the bill did not accurately reflect the President’s priorities, he shouldn’t have had a victory party media event. It reminds one of the “Mission Accomplished” speech where Bush 43 declared victory in the war against terrorism. Talk about catching the winning pass, running it down a clear field, and then spiking the ball before crossing the goal line!

          The CBD is run by a Republican who was appointed by the Republican leaders in both Houses of Congress. If it is unreliable, the leadership is responsible. Nobody questions that premiums have doubled since 2013. The question is whether they rose any more under ObamaCare than they would have risen in a free market, and whether they will rise any less under TrumpCare.

          The answer to that is, apparently, that TrumpCare health costs will be substantially less for healthy young men than if they were paying into an insurance pool alongside the sick, the aged, and women. Hardly a shocker. That is how insurance works. Even those guys will be getting policies with substantially higher deductables than is currently allowed, so their health costs will go up dramatically over the ObamaCare case if they get sick.

          If you are poor and 64, you will be paying from 8 to 10 times as much for significantly less coverage. (Actually, you won’t, because you will not be able to afford medical insurance.) If you are a woman, you will be paying extra if you want any of the maternity and contraception benefits that are currently included in your insurance.

          Again, that isn’t exactly what was promised.

          Oh, and by the way, Carrier just announced that all those jobs that Candidate Trump promised to same and President-elect Trump announced he had saved are going to Mexico anyway.

      1. The CBO is unreliable in evaluating health-care legislation.

        BTW, another report from the Department of Health and Human Services, shows that health-care insurance premiums more than doubled on average since 2013.

        Obamacare has, as we told you it would, failed. Government is not your mommy. Let the some real competition into the healthcare market and prices would decrease. The insurance companies will fight that tooth and nail along with their partners in crime, the Democrat Party (Obamacare was nothing but a gift to insurance companies).

        1. “The CBO is unreliable in evaluating health-care legislation.”

          Well, pray tell who is qualified, Mr. Know It All. The CBO was appointed by Congress to do the evaluation in a non partisan manner. The fact that you can’t stand anything that isn’t slanted in your partisan favor speaks volumes.

          1. The CBO does not take into account the planned future legislation.The CBO does not score legislation dynamically. It ignores growth that results from tax cuts and the reduced growth that results from tax increases in its projections – a practice that fails to accurately model reality.

            Wednesday’s CBO projection did not model for states choosing to waive costly insurance regulations – a feature certain to lower premiums beyond that claimed in the report.

            The same CBO originally projected 22 million people enrolled in Obamacare exchanges by 2016, when in reality there were only 10 million. The CBO was off by 120 percent, a staggering error.

            In 2013, when Obama sought to reverse the George W. Bush tax cuts for the highest-income earners, CBO estimated the federal government would raise $650 billion over the next 10 years. Later, new projections had to be issued which forecast a decline in revenues of $4.2 trillion, due to CBO not taking into account what the higher tax rate would do to economic growth.

            The CBO was wrong when they analyzed Obamacare’s effect on cost and coverage, and they are wrong again. — Tom Price, U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary

            1. You are wrong. The CBO specifically does project future growth rates, they just happen to be based in reality rather than in the fantastic campaign bullshit that Trump spewed.

              The USA will not see a 4% GDP growth on Trump’s watch unless congress is dumb enough to plunge the nation into insane deficit spending that spikes unsustainable short term growth, which will be followed by recession and new record accumulated debt.

              Just like happened ever time before, from both parties.

              iCal that.

    3. Health care and in particular Social Security, that was paid into by U.S. citizens, is not an entitlement. (Social Security funds from taxpayers that time and again the government has borrowed from that is not theirs to spend.) The system has to pay back into itself to a certain degree and not as all entitlements via tax cuts mostly to the rich and excessive military spending. It really comes down to priorities and who we want to be as a nation. I guess it doesn’t unfathomably bother low rung conservatives in the poverty to middle class zone when social benefits & health care are cut altogether, reduced in coverage and eligibility or monthly nut increased exponentially? I haven’t met an American yet who wants to pay exorbitant taxes or excessively high health care bills. We need balance, a concept neither Democrats nor Republicans are seemingly familiar with. Both are steaming piles of party politics looking more after their own interests and screw their fellow Americans.

    4. If taxes were zero, the economy would be limitlessly robust and dominant forever.

      And infrastructure would be infinitely better, and I mean literally infinately, and the Pentagon would have a totally, limitless, unsurpassed budget to itself.

    5. “If you have run up a $20 trillion national debt, yes, you have to cut spending.”

      To be more accurate, I would say “control” spending. But I agree that flat or decreasing budgets in some areas would be appropriate.

      Part of controlling overall spending is controlling defense spending. Trump wants to increase defense spending by over $50B annually. That does not make any sense in this context. Speak to that, please.

      Where you fail, Fwhatever, is your insistence on sticking to the long-term Republican focus on cutting tax rates. This approach fails in several respects.

      First, the supply-side/trickle-down GOP policies are based on the concept that economic growth will increase revenues and overcome the reductions in tax rates. If you construct a tax revenue versus tax rate curve and take the derivative, you can solve for the inflection point that maximizes revenue. If the effective tax rates were higher, then cutting tax rates might work. But the current tax rates are, in my opinion, already below that inflection point. As a result, tax rate cuts will result in tax revenue decreases. Like overpopulation and climate change, you can deny the math and the physics, but the universe does not give a damn about your flawed opinions. So tax cuts are *not* free and they *will* increase the deficit.

      Second, it can take years for the economic growth to occur. Deficits will spike in the near term.

      Third, most of the tax cut money will go to the wealthy, who will spend a little and invest the rest. But that does not necessarily result in growth or job creation. Only investments that drive the growth of companies or the start of new companies will create lots of new jobs. If you return $10M in taxes to Buffett and it is invested in purchasing shares of a Fortune 500 company, then relatively little is accomplished except enriching Buffett, increasing the deficit and the accumulated national debt, and, perhaps, boosting the stock market a bit.

      In addition, you need to consider that spending cuts alone will not come close to balancing the budget. Look at the numbers. It won’t work. You have to increase revenues along with cutting spending. People need to pay for the services that they receive.

      Furthermore, you fail to consider the impact of the existing debt and debt service payments. The interest on $20T is huge – $600B per year at 3%. The fact that short and long term interest rates have been near historical lows for about two decades is the only thing that has kept the debt payments and deficits anywhere close to manageable. What happens when interest rates rise to 5% or 6%? The increase in the debt service will more than wipe out any conceivable level of spending cuts that the government can achieve. In 2000, the U.S. started down the inevitable path to economic
      collapse. Even if American citizens were willing to make the sacrifices and politicians were willing to finally make the tough decisions, I am not sure that we could stop before the cliff. Sad, but true. Math does not lie.

        1. President Trump was absolutely magnificent on his first overseas trip!

          A BRILLIANT strategy President Trump systematically visited the epicenter of the world’s largest religions. Islam, Judiasm and Catholicism in that order. Then went on to attempt a fix to NATO that generations before him have been unable to do.

          Simply, marvelous … 🇺🇸

        2. With Trump you have to watch what he’s doing and pay no attention to his lies. Botty and Firsty both eat up Trump’s words like it was cocain skittles.

  2. Both sides are crooks and have their own agenda! We the middle class get screwed either way! Would rather have Trump over Hillary though as the county map agreed! Time for all to back the current president and get stuff done as the people want. Not fight and make up lies like children and what the left has been doing!

  3. Twitter, once a promising platform for dialogue, has proven to become little more than a narcissism amplifier or misinformation broadcaster. Deep dialogue and nuanced verifiable information is not shared on this platform. But then, these forums are little better without an edit function enabled.

    Trump’s inability to use or understand the power and advantage of the iPhone speaks volumes — he is a myopic blowhard who broadcasts the last thing Fox News talking heads speculated instead of listening & gathering information from all around him.

    Which all leads to the biggest problem: Twitter and Facebook and MDN echo chambers are killing democracy. The partisan rancor is tearing the nation apart. The two party system was never envisioned by the authors of the constitution, but the entrenched interests have so corrupted the processes that were obviously implied in the Constitution. The populace has been set up to fight each other than to find common goals and means of achieving them. Nobody has ever defined what “Great Again” means, or how to measure it, or who is going to pay for it. Actually, neither party pays for anything — Wall Street makes sure that the nation uses deficit spending. For every sin of one party, there is just as bad on the other side. Both parties are entirely corrupt and beholden to the moneyed special interests that have only one goal: personal power (wealth) maximization at the expense of everyone, from any nation. Corporations do not respect nations. Corporations do not respect individuals. Corporate executives and their Wall Street handlers use the people of all nations as pawns, and the people’s representatives as waterboys.

    The sickening thing is that the partisans on this board cannot see or recognize how thoroughly they have been played. They cannot agree to use objective data to discuss the situation. They just parrot back convenient narratives that have been fed to them by corrupt political machines. Modern Rome is burning.

    1. Yes, thank you President Trump for getting Saudi Arabia to get serious about terrorism!

      President Trump and King Salman opening Saudi Arabia’s new Global Center for Combatting Extremist Ideology:

      1. Yes, it is amazing how the Kingdom followed Trump’s lead and made the decision to establish the Center, build the building, hire the staff, and began operations—all since last November 8.

        It is not so amazing that the extreme Sunni sect that has shared power with the House of Saud (and has been using state funds to export its ideology) since the 18th Century still dominates the Kingdom. These—not the Iraqis, not the Libyans, and not the Iranians—are the people who brought us 9/11, and they are still in power.

        It is not amazing that those sectarians set the agenda that oppresses foreigners, women, and non-members of the sect, and that bankrolls wars all over the Middle East. It is not amazing that the Saudi definition of “extremist ideology” excludes fundamentalist Sunnis but includes even moderate Shiites. Al-Queda, the so-called Islamic State, and most of their comrades are Sunni recipients of Saudi funds.

        Given the number of Saudi dollars rolling into American bank accounts, we should not be amazed that one of the most totalitarian countries on earth is now being extolled as a partner in building Trump’s New World Order while the almost equally authoritarian country across the Gulf is demonized. At least Iran goes through the motions of electing its government.

  4. Most of us Canadians wonder how Americans can still support Trump after all that has gone on. We value respect and integrity. He has none. You guys must be so proud that he represents your values to the world. Is this the role model you want your kids to emulate.

    Yeah yeah… go ahead and slag me Trump supporters. None of us really give a shyte what you think.

  5. Dear rest of the world, please keep in mind that a solid majority of US citizens who bothered to vote (~48%) did not vote for The Trump. (And no, that majority did not exclusively vote for Princess Hillary either). The Trump’s current approval rating in the US is ~36%. IOW: We’re not all *ahem* Trumpian. In fact, most of us are not.

    1. “The Trump’s current approval rating in the US is ~36%…”

      brought to you by the same polls who predicted Brexit loss and a win for The Clot!

      1. You beat me to it. If anything the real lesson of the last election taught us you can’t trust the polls or the manufactured media. BOTH used bias and skewed methods to always arrive at the same preconceived solution favoring Democrats …

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.