Only Gridlock Can Save America Now

Divided government is better.


When Republicans lost the presidential election back at the Republican National Convention in July, many elected GOPers feigned support for the Party's doomed nominee in an effort to placate the base and hold their majority in Congress. After watching Donald Trump's Access Hollywood tape (honestly, does anyone believe this is the last, or most odious, of the October surprises?), some of these candidates have decided the gambit wasn't worth it.

So naturally, Trump has targeted down-ballot races in his own party—people like House Speaker Paul Ryan and Sen. John McCain. As it turns out, cult leaders are less concerned about the long-term philosophical aims of your political party than they are about your personal loyalty and subservience.

But if the prospects of a Hillary Clinton presidency are truly as apocalyptic as I'm told, shouldn't Republicans be appalled that their nominee is undermining the only institution in Washington, D.C., that has the power to stop her agenda, should he lose the race? After all, it wasn't Ryan who coaxed Trump into vulgarity on a hot mic.

I hear this absurd myth every day: "Well, what's the difference? These cowardly Republicans have given President Obama everything he wanted!"

Elsewhere, I've gone into great detail, debunking the idea that Congress has enabled Obama's agenda in toto—a belief that is pervasive among Trump supporters. In reality, a GOP Congress spent eight years doing the opposite. Not only did it block dozens of progressive initiatives and reforms but it often sued the president for abusing his executive power (and won a host of cases).

These presidential overreaches, incidentally, were necessitated by the GOP's effective "obstructionism"—which is just another way of describing the manifestation of a divided nation's will.

Of course this Republican Congress is infuriating. It often fails. It often folds. It creates unrealistic expectations. It struggles to find compelling arguments that appeal to its base. It picks mediocre candidates and is often paralyzed by risk-aversion.

Yet it's also true that an uncompromising legislative branch stymied an uncompromising ideologue in the White House. I note the former with admiration because, despite the assertions of our political class, the most crucial task of those elected to Congress isn't to pass minimum-wage laws but to check the power of the executive branch. They did it better than most.

This time around, both of our big-government candidates deserve to grapple with gridlock for the next four years. There's simply no better antidote to the authoritarianism and corruption that has infected our political causes. In fact, if Republicans somehow hold the Senate, they should also have the spine to preserve the even 4-4 split in the Supreme Court, to stop a potentially progressive judicial branch from further empowering the state.

For those who believe stopping runaway government is a political liability, remember that despite the incessant warnings from Democrats, the GOP was not punished for its obstinacy. It has won two wave elections and more than 900 state seats during the Obama years. Imagine what it could have done with competent leadership.

Moreover, despite more incessant warnings about economic Armageddon, the country did not collapse. Just ask Democrats—because these days they make the most persuasive case for obstruction.

"Real hourly wages have grown faster over the current business cycle than in any cycle since the early 1970s," Jason Furman, chairman of Obama's Council of Economic Advisers, tells us. Thank you, gridlock!

"Under Obama, stock market has tripled, returning an annualized 11.8 percent ex dividends," says union bailout architect Steven Rattner on Twitter. OK. Thanks again, gridlock!

For the past eight years, Congress has passed absolutely no new economic reforms. I know this because every liberal pundit, every liberal functionary, every elected official in the Democratic Party and virtually every editorial board in the country has argued that Republicans were engaged in an unprecedented obstruction of Obama's agenda.

Not long ago, Rattner claimed on MSNBC that Republicans had "blocked every single piece, virtually, of legislation that Obama put forward." So, then, what exactly have Democrats done to make wages grow faster? What have they done to make stocks returns grow at such an impressive pace? They've done the best thing possible: nothing.

For some unfathomable reason, not only did Republicans decide to hand the presidency to Hillary Clinton but they're now cheering a nominee who is urging his fans to destroy that last safeguard.

From a conservative perspective, surely, even a timid Congress is more useful than one that "fixes" Obamacare and overturns the Hyde Amendment and passes anti-gun legislation and revisits cap and trade and proposes dozens of other bills Republicans allegedly haven't prevented. This is all going to happen if they lose. In the end, Trump won't only lose the presidency; he will help Democrats create one-party rule.


NEXT: Donald Trump Responds to Assault Allegations, U.S. Strikes Sites in Yemen, Gov. Christie Faces Court Summons over Bridgegate: P.M. Links

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

    1. My friend 'Sarah Bartlett' makes $95/hour on the internet. She has been laid off for six months but last month her paycheck was $14750 just working on the internet for a few hours.. Go to this website and click tech tab to start your own work.... http://www.Trends88.Com

  1. Sorry chum, I missed the part where congress gave Obama the authority to wage war.

    1. They did that back in 2001 or so in a vague AUMF that apparently lasts forever.

      1. Infinite war... which Killary will pick up, unless the Donald wins, and then congress will discover the limits of executive power.

  2. Thankfully I think the general consensus with actual Republicans is that Trump doesn't represent them all... And I think most conservative leaning folks who are not officially Republican party members get that too.

    Also the types that understand how politics really work in this country get that if Hillary is in there they're going to want Republicans in congress. So I really don't think the Republicans are going to lose both houses or anything. Their current lead in seats is too great. They may lose a few seats here and there thanks to Trump, but I just can't imagine a total blood bath. Even if they lose the Senate there is plenty of obstruction to be had with just one of the 2 chambers. Thank God!

    All I really was hoping for this go around was a wishy washy Republican to stomp Hillary into the dirt. It would have been sooo easy. Anybody 2 notches up from Bush II would have been fine. But nooo, Trump had to come along. If he didn't have so much dirt/sketchiness so as to sink himself I would have been fine with him too. He's just a loud mouth who probably wouldn't have accomplished anything... But he had to be so crappy he's likely going to lose to Hillary. Ugh.

  3. There it is...the apocalyptic vision from the GOP and not spoken by Trump. "Everything's broken," apologies to Bob Dylan. All that is left to Harsanyi is stopping those who will surely destroy us from within. Compromise? Recognizing that at a minimum at least half the country disagrees with you? Meh. Quaint notions to the likes of Harsanyi.

    Spoken like the grade schooler Garsanyi is...taking his ball and going home.

    1. "WAAAAH! Give me what I want!"

      Sorry. Some of us have principals.

    2. I just hope we can take back the democracy that was stolen by the rich and turned into a plutocracy.

      1. Remember who else wanted to save a country from plutokraten?

        1. I read that as "plutokratom," and immediately thought of the DEA.

          1. To paraphrase Gary, what is plutokratom?

          2. Is that the name of the new Vietnamese strain?

  4. Civics and American Government 101: Checks and Balances. Anyone remember this?

    Gridlock is indeed a feature, not a bug. It's supposed to work that way.

  5. If a Democratic congress refused to appoint a supreme court justice the way this congress has and might continue to do, a Republican president would arrest every single Democratic congressmen.

    1. That's just good governance to Harsanyi. He missed Mick Jagger when he said you can't always get what you want, but if you try sometimes...he doesn't want to try anymore...its end times, I guess.

    2. No president is owed the approval of the Congress, and if a President were ever to attempt to imprison a congressperson for doing their job they would be rightfully impeached and imprisoned as a tyrant. The Constitution does not mandate the size of the Supreme Court, so the size and membership of the court is entirely up to the discretion of the Congress. If Congress decides that the Supreme Court should have only eight members, then that is the proper size of the court and the President has no right to complain if they refuse to expand it.

  6. True dat.

  7. It's time for the GOP to pick their 2020 candidate. Honey Boo Boo not old enough so going to be tough.

  8. Up-ballot: VOTE TRUMP

    Down-ballot: RINO HUNTING

    1. RINO is generally a retarded term but if it applied to anybody wouldn't it be Trump? I mean he is literally a Republican in name only for the purpose of getting nominated.

      1. He has prinicpals, not principles, its okay.

      2. Your mistake is thinking that SIV has a point to make other than VOTE DADDY.

      3. Yep, the term RINO is stupid. It's a True Scotsman argument.

        Republican is a party, not an ideology.

        On a related note, a prog friend argued that Obama is "not a democrat"

        I replied "Oh, when did he change his party affiliation?"

  9. Democrats had best be careful what they wish for. If they get control of the Congress as well as the White House, who are they going to blame when their dumbass policies fuck everything up? Are they just going to rely on the good old "Bush's fault!"? That's worn a bit thin.

    That's the fun thing about being in charge; you're responsible for the results of your decisions. Of course those fucking statist bastards will squirm every which way to avoid it; but they'll need to some serious contortions if they're in control of the whole shop.

      1. I was just thinking this. They were held accountable by losing their majority big time, but ultimately they blamed all the problems on Republican obstructionism. They'd no doubt say the same thing as long as there's even one Republican in the Senate or Congress.

        The Democrats will never own up to how badly they've screwed up. They will simply say they didn't centrally plan hard enough to overcome the Republicans, even when it's manifestly true that Republican obstructionism didn't have a single thing to do with it.

        1. And since the Dems own the media, "blame the Republicans" will be the accepted narrative.

        2. I never imagined that the Dems would own their fuckups (why start now?) but I think it will be entertaining to see how far they'll twist themselves up to avoid it.

          As far as a greater backlash goes, I don't imagine it would be within my lifetime. But I suspect they'll eventually come to a bad end, maybe even find themselves up against a bullet-pocked wall.

          1. +1 Warren Zevon!

    1. Nope. See California. No matter how large the dem supermajority, the fact that a conservative exists, anywhere on the planet, is the reason all their plans turn to ashes in their mouths.

      I've seriously heard it argued that even if there wasn't a single republican in government, it would still be their fault because the dems would be constrained by not getting to overreach as far as they liked for fear of losing votes to conservatives. This person believed that the real problem is that conservatives are allowed to vote at all, and the mere threat of their not voting liberal is enough to ruin the world. When pressed, this person admitted that they believed the two parties in our system should be the socialists and the democrats (the modern incarnation of which is hyper right-wing for refusing to nationalize all major utilities and industries, according to this person).

      Of course that is almost assuredly not representative of the majority view of rank-and-file democratic voters. But it's illustrative of the mental contortions they can go through to blame failure on anything but themselves.

    2. If they get control of the Congress as well as the White House, who are they going to blame when their dumbass policies fuck everything up?

      Donald Trump.


  10. This isn't really on topic, but I had the misfortune to watch CBS News last night while they were covering some 'political news'.

    Normally, the only news I bother with is print in some form or fashion. After watching just 30 minutes of the news, I felt convinced that it's propaganda. I studied propaganda in school, and it was actually kind of terrifying to watch the open partisanship of a 'major' entrenched media outlet.

    I know this election is a bad decision and a worse decision, but I'm no longer shocked when people talk about media bias. I knew it existed, but the mask hasn't just slipped it's around their ankles. This isn't Journalism with a capital J, it's partisan cheerleading. It's clear most, if not all, major outlets have decided that to stop Trump they need to engage in every dirty trick they have in their arsenal.

    Trump is terrible, it's true, but what's more terrible is what his candidacy has revealed in major media outlets. I don't know if it's just for ratings, or to openly support their preferred candidate, but it's disgusting. The fear mongering and open hostility towards Russia in and around Syria could very well become a full fledged World War with Russia, and I'm not keen on Hillary Clinton using them as a fear-bat to beat America over the head with. To win this election, she may lose in foreign policy for the duration of her stay in office while also starting a war that we're in no position to win.

    1. Tricky Dick Nixon amended the IRS code within 24 hours of the LP filing its papers. His signature on the work of Congress to this day uses tax revenue to bribe the media to ignore small parties, and subsidize entrenched looters with extorted cash. And you are surprised that corporate, military-industrial complex teevee is propaganda? It is exactly what Aldous Huxley predicted it would be, and GOP infiltrators in here wailing that their pit bull is losing a rigged dogfight are getting exactly what they deserve. Schadenfreude, not sympathy!

  11. Ars Technica reports that Big Soda only sponsors health research orgs to buy silence and complicity:


    Korparashunz bad. Taxes good. Sugar bad. Consensus. Science. Deniers. Consensus.

  12. "When Republicans lost the presidential election back at the Republican National Convention in July . . ."

    They lost it long before that, methinks.

  13. Sorry but gridlock can't save America. Things cannot go on as they are much longer. There are problems that are going to have to be dealt with. "Not making things worse" isn't going to cut it anymore.

    It is not so much that I disagree with this article it is how dishonest it is. David Harsanyi doesn't mean a word of it. He doesn't think gridlock will save America. He thinks Hillary will save America by continuing the elite class, which Harsanyi considers himself to be a member, rule of the country. When he says "gridlock" he is really saying Hillary. He is just not honest enough to admit it.

    I have just had it with the third rate wanna be intellectuals on the Right. In many ways guys like Harsanyi are worse than the left. The Left is nuts and generally evil but there is an honesty about their evil that is refreshing compared to the intellectual bankruptcy, craven self interest and intellectual bankruptcy of people like Harsanyi.

    What has any of these self appointed elites and "opinion leaders" like Hersanyi ever done to deserve the platforms they have been given? If you met Hersanyi in a bar, would you give a shit what he had to say or what he thought anymore than the guy sitting next to him? I wouldn't and see no reason why anyone else would. I have more respect for a good number of the regular posters on this board than I do for Hersanyi and those like him. They all need to go away and let some smarter and more honest people take their places.

    1. Interesting...so did Harsanyi give any reliable evidence of supporting Hillary - or are you just going with your gut?

      1. The evidence is the implications of what he is saying. It is not hard to figure out. Suddenly Hyrsani loves gridlock? Really? An ideological conservative with lots of top men big plans for America now concludes that doing nothing is the only way to save America?

        Yeah right. Are you unable to read with any precision and understand the context and unstated assumptions and implications of a text or just choose not to do so when it suits your purposes?

        1. I thought he said that, *given what he sees as Trump's impending defeat,* gridlock is the way to go. That is, Republicans blocking the initiatives of a Democratic President.

          I was wondering if any of Harsanyi's other articles betrayed a similar alleged preference for Hillary, or if it only showed up in this one article?

          1. Hyrsanni has long been in the Never Trump crowd. His preference for Hillary is well known. Hysanni is one of the people who turned conservatism into an ideology of up tight upper class white people who hate taxes and abortion but love ruling over their inferiors. Exactly what basis he concludes he is anyone's superior remains a mystery known only to him.

            1. I hadn't known this...are there other examples (besides this article) of Harsanyi revealing such views?

              1. (because I'm not a Harsanyi expert and it's perfectly possible I've missed his pro-Hillary, top-person advocacy)

                1. Well, I'm going to guess that you're jumping to conclusions.

                  1. I am going to guess you have no idea what you are talking about. You know how to use google. Go look yourself. If you disagree, then come back and say why.

                    If you like him, good for you. I am utterly unimpressed with his thinking, writing and honesty. the fact that he takes some positions I agree with doesn't change my overall assessment of him.

                    I guess I am just not as easily impressed as you are.

                    1. Burden of proof is on the individual making the assertion.

                    2. Exactly. John, you're often very informative, but when you start going on about what other people are *really* saying or thinking, sometimes you seem to go beyond what the evidence warrants.

                      I'm not enough of a Harsanyi fan to set time aside to review all his articles - either your assertion is based on this particular article, in which case your evidence isn't convincing - or there's other articles which helped persuade you, in which case maybe they'd persuade me, as well, but I won't look around at random to see which articles these are.

    2. It's been hilarious to see the conservatives (and conservative-leaners) here turn on Harsanyi in the last year and a half just because he's been harsh on Trump. Before that, he was one of their favorite people published here, and his articles (which were often critical of the Republican establishment as well as Obama and the Democrats) often had comments in them like "Why doesn't Reason publish more people like Harsanyi instead of Chapman, etc.?" But all that changed when he refused to get on board the Trump train.

  14. The Republicans lost the presidential election even before 2007, while ramping up the faith-based asset-forfeiture looting "intended" to enforce prohibition laws creating victimless crimes. Herbert Hoover enacted nearly identical laws and Executive Orders with exactly the same intentions and exactly the same results. After Hoover's GOP destroyed the nation's equity and capital, two decades would pass before another religious hatemongers had another chance to crush the First, Fourth, Firth, Sixth and 10th Amendments through the coercive enactment of superstitious nonsense. State governors have undersood since 1932 that prohibitionist looting by unproductive hands ruins a nation's economy. Hence the wave of libertarian-enabled repeal campaigns.

    1. Cool story, bro.

      1. Thanks. I copied it from the Hoover and Bush Presidential Papers.

  15. If team blue turns out enough of their zombies on election day and Trump voters are sufficiently obedient enough to their master to vote against his own party down ticket, then I can see both houses going to the dems along with the presidency. Hillary will be president either way and she will be much more insidious than Obama about using executive power if a GOP congress tries to block her. If she has a dem congress, it will be even worse. My district VA-8 always re-elects the dem with 75% of the vote, so it matters very little if I vote at all down ticket.

    1. It's not looking like this will happen, though, according to polls.

      1. Yeah, most polls show the Rs losing a few seats in the house and one or two in the senate, so there's a good chance neither one will flip to the Ds.

        1. 538 recently had an interesting article about how the latest Clinton surge in the polls has not been accompanied by a corresponding surge for the Senate Democrats, which is unlike the previous surges where the two moved in tandem. It looks increasingly likely that this election will produce a status quo ante, with the President a D and both houses of Congress R-controlled.

    2. Prophesying. What is religion without prophesy? But induction and math will get you through times of no prophets better than prophets will get you through times of no induction and math. Just ask Paddypower

  16. http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publi.....atch_oct14

    LA Times and Reuters are showing pretty much the same thing. Maybe all three of them are completley out to lunch. I honestly have no idea. Everyone seems to have a poll that tells them what the want to believe these days. That being said, I have yet to hear anyone explain why it is certain that Rasmussan and the LA Times in particular are completely wrong other than because they seem to consistently show Trump doing better than other polls and we all know that can't be true. I am not a Top Man like Hyrsanni. I just have a JD and a couple of masters degrees but i think even a bumpkin like me can recognize a tautology when I see it.

    1. I think part of it is that Rasmussen was wrong the last time around, so their methodology is questionable. LA Times supposedly uses a strange weighting system, but I don't know how true that is. I think it's also true that other polls like NBC/CNN over sample Democrats based on Obama-level turnout assumptions, so who the fuck knows what the reality is.

      1. That is just it, no one knows what the truth is or which poll is right. Every polling firm has their success stories and failures. Rasmussan was wrong last time around but other polling firms have been wrong other times. It is impossible to say who is going to be right this time. Yet, people like Hyrsanny repeat the talking point that the election is decided. They somehow know where logic and facts tell a different story.

    2. John,

      The LA Times trend has been terrible for Trump. Look at the long-term data - Trump is at about the worst he's ever been in that poll. He's consistently led it even in times where every other poll had him down. Trump had at least a 4 point lead in that poll before the video came out - it's not supporting your assertion that the video has had no effect on the campaign.

      Polling averages are far more predictive than an individual poll. And the averages are showing Clinton with a 5-7 point lead nationally which is a sizable advantage.

      1. I disagree about the averages. The averages always over rate the Dem advantage because they include polls that are weighted way too much for Democrats. The results of any given poll vary from year to year. Sometimes they are closer to right than others. Democrats always under perform the average. The RCP average had Obama 7 points ahead in the weekend before the 2012 election and he ended up winning by under 4. There were a few polls that got it right, one poll Rasmussen had Romney slightly ahead but several polls had Obama ahead by 8 or 9 points. That skewed the average way up.

        In 14, the average of the polls polls had it 50 50 whether the Republicans would take the Senate as late as the week before the election. Right before the election they finally tipped towards the Republicans. I think the weekend before Nate Silver finally gave the Republicans a 75% chance of taking a small majority in the Senate. But even then, they under estimated the Republican Surge and didn't reflect it until very late. All thought September and most of October the averages were saying the Republicans were not going to take the Senate.

      2. So, the average is not the end all be all. If there is one poll that shows something that none of the others show, like Rasmussen showing Romney winning in 12, it is a very good bet that is an outlier. If there are multiple polls showing something, it is much less likely for that to be the case. Right now we have three polls that show the race to be a tie or Trump slightly ahead and four or five other polls that show Hillary with a big lead. That gives you a five point Hillary lead in the average. But reality doesn't usually split the difference. Either the polls showing it close are right or the polls showing Hillary way ahead are right. It is very doubtful to be somewhere in between. None of the polls are showing that. Which set of polls are right? I don't know. But I don't think you can dismiss the ones that show it a tie or Trump ahead anymore than I can dismiss the ones that show him behind. It is not as simple as just averaging all the numbers, because it is possible that one or two polls are really wrong thus totally screwing up your average. What is Rasmussan and Reuters are totally wrong? Then the lead is like 11 points. It could be either way.

  17. OT, sort of-my 6 year old son asked me to help him make signs for a Trump club he and his buddy are starting in their 1st grade class. 5 minutes earlier, he told me that I must vote for Hillary because she will build more schools and hospitals (according to his grandma). I got a good chuckle out of the "Trump club" signs but my wife is pissed, presumably because she thinks word will get out that we are Trumptards...

    1. The first rule of Trump Club: Always, always, always talk about Trump Club.

      1. Trump Ace beats Trump Club, right?

        1. D'oh!

          Trump Spade beats Trump Club, right?

  18. I have decided that Mr. Trump started his campaign on a whim--to see if he could get Hillary and her cohorts elected. They are more clearly his natural allies. It's working, too.

    1. I too have long thought the same thing-his entire campaign has been a joke and the scary thing is that everyone is taking it seriously...

      1. I am unsure whether it is deliberate scuttling by those who believe in government paychecks as opposed to jihad Crusades, prohibitionism or forcing women to reproduce against their will, or the same wave of ignorant redneck populism that got the Tea-totalitarians on teevee back during the Depression. Sinking the party would cause the mystical prohibitionist rats to swim away, but it is hard to imagine anything The Don could do worse than the George Waffen Bush faith-based asset-forfeiture Crash and Depression.
        Econazi spoiler votes made the Dems Green with envy. Maybe Teatotalitarian spoiler votes made the GO-Pee brownshirted with bullshit?

  19. RE: Only Gridlock Can Save America Now
    Divided government is better.

    This way, nothing will change for the better, and our obvious betters enslaving us will continue to enslave us while simultaneously get richer off our tax dollars.
    It won't get any better than that.

  20. until I looked at the paycheck saying $4730 , I did not believe that...my... brother woz like actualy bringing in money part time from there computar. . there friend brother started doing this for less than 7 months and resently paid for the morgage on there home and bought a new Cadillac .......

    ........ http://www.jobprofit9.com

  21. Facebook gives you a great opportunity to earn 98652$ at your home.If you are some intelligent you makemany more Dollars.I am also earning many more, my relatives wondered to see how i settle my Life in few days thank GOD to you for this...You can also make cash i never tell alie you should check this I am sure you shocked to see this amazing offer...I'm Loving it!!!!
    ????????> http://www.factoryofincome.com

  22. I am making $89/hour working from home. I never thought that it was legitimate but my best friend is earning $10 thousand a month by working online, that was really surprising for me, she recommended me to try it. just try it out on the following website.

    ===> http://www.NetNote70.com

  23. Peyton . even though Billy `s report is cool... on monday I got a gorgeous Maserati after I been earnin $8985 thiss month and even more than ten k lass month . it's certainly the easiest work Ive ever had . I started this 9-months ago and practically straight away started bringin home at least $78 per-hr . look at this now

    ................ http://www.jobhub44.com

  24. Matthew . I can see what your saying... Bobby `s storry is surprising, last saturday I got a brand new Land Rover Defender since I been making $4556 this past 5 weeks and more than ten-grand this past-month . this is definitely my favourite-job I have ever had . I began this 4 months ago and immediately made more than $71 per-hr . More Info
    ????????> http://www.factoryofincome.com

  25. I can agree with the theme of the article. Gridlock is and always will be the best thing for america. If they went a year without being able to pass a single law, ameirca would in fact do well. Gridlock is good.
    On the other hand, the very first sentence of this article is bogus itself.
    We are also coming off of 10, not 8, 10 long long miserable years of democrat marxist flavored rule, similar to 1919 in fact, read up on that platform it is amazing how close it is to today.
    The media is doing a full court press for the Democrats, Democrats are also stepping up election rigging and fraud, as the Project Veritas people uncovered. Even the recent video, the only real attack that worked is invalidated by a video of Hillary talking to Lena Dunham about lenny kravitz's junk, all we have is apparently all people at their level are pigs.
    Trump will definitely cause gridlock regardless of who is in Congress. Hillary, it wont matter who is in congress either, as we now know Paul Ryan is a leftist democrat who happens to put R beside his name as a Manchurian. There is no reason to believe the RNC elites will not help hillary too.
    So the only way America wins is to put trump in for the minimal goal of gridlock. In the Elitist world, Hillary is winning, no question. They want it to be so. From the perspective of the rest of the country, Trump appears to be winning as the fact he is still tied and the draw of donations and rally attendance shows.

  26. Bella . I can see what your saying... Jesus `s blurb is good, on wednesday I bought a new Lotus Elan after making $9196 this last 4 weeks an would you believe 10/k lass month . this is really the nicest work I've ever done . I started this 5 months ago and almost straight away brought home minimum $73.. per hour . read
    ????????> http://www.factoryofincome.com

  27. Anna . I see what you mean... Virginia `s postlng is incredible, last tuesday I got a new Audi Quattro after having made $5000 this last 5 weeks and over 10k this past month . without a doubt it is the coolest work I have ever had . I started this seven months/ago and pretty much immediately started making minimum $85 per hour . view it
    ????????> http://www.factoryofincome.com

  28. Liliana . if you think Lawrence `s blog is incredible, I just purchased a new Honda after earning $5741 this - 4 weeks past and also 10 grand lass month . it's by-far the most-comfortable job I have ever done . I started this four months/ago and almost immediately began to make minimum $85... p/h .

    see this................ http://www.BuzzNews10.com

  29. until I looked at the paycheck saying $4730 , I did not believe that...my... brother woz like actualy bringing in money part time from there computar. . there friend brother started doing this for less than 7 months and resently paid for the morgage on there home and bought a new Cadillac .......

    .................. http://www.jobprofit9.com

  30. until I looked at the paycheck saying $4730 , I did not believe that...my... brother woz like actualy bringing in money part time from there computar. . there friend brother started doing this for less than 7 months and resently paid for the morgage on there home and bought a new Cadillac .......

    ........ http://www.jobprofit9.com

  31. While coming to education, the technology has brought many advantages to students and as well as teachers. showbox For example, students can do their homework or assignment with ease and can complete it faster by using the Internet.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.