RebKell's Junkie Boards
Board Junkies Forums
 
Log in Register FAQ Memberlist Search RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index

The Debates
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » Area 51
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
cthskzfn



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 12851
Location: In a world where a PSYCHOpath like Trump isn't potus.


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/22/16 4:54 pm    ::: The Debates Reply Reply with quote

Might as well start a thread...

The schedule:

http://www.uspresidentialelectionnews.com/2016-debate-schedule/2016-presidential-debate-schedule/


I think Trump will crush Clinton. This stage is his playground. His bully/pathological liar persona, coupled w/ Clinton's pedestrian quick wit/retort ability, could make it ugly.

I hope I'm wrong.

But, even should Clinton somehow "win", she'll be declared the "loser".

This I know.



_________________
Silly, stupid white people might be waking up.
mercfan3



Joined: 23 Nov 2004
Posts: 19725



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/22/16 5:33 pm    ::: Re: The Debates Reply Reply with quote

Clinton typically wins debates against reasonable people. She's a policy wonk, so anytime a debate centers around actual policy, she's got an advantage.

It's going to be hard for Clinton to win against Trump though, who is simply a circus performer. The bar is going to be set very different for both of them. All Trump has to do is speak in complete sentences. (Hard for him), and not say anything to god awful (very hard for him).

I've read that Clinton is going to try and subtly provoke him to try and get a meltdown. She's basically done a psychoanalysis on the guy. Look for her to somehow question the amount of money he has. This seems to get under his skin more than anything.

"Millionaires like Donald and I should pay our fair share of taxes."



_________________
“Anyone point out that a Donald Trump anagram is ‘Lord Dampnut’”- Colin Mochrie
tfan



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 9543



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/23/16 5:32 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I don't remember a single member of the media saying that Sanders won a debate with Clinton.


pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66773
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/23/16 6:56 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Trump needs to be presidential. If he can project gravitas and make people believe he's a serious person ready to do a serious job, he'll win the debates and the election.



_________________
Let us not deceive ourselves. Our educational institutions have proven to be no bastions of democracy.
GlennMacGrady



Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 8151
Location: Heisenberg


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/23/16 8:27 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

The polls are close enough that a clear victor in the three debates could win the election.

The debates will not be won or lost on verbal eloquence about issues. Or on policy substance.

The winner will be, very simply, the candidate who projects the most likeable persona, and who inspires in viewers the most feelings of competence, confidence and trust. If there's a clear winner on these emotional connections after the three debates, that will be the next President.

These kinds of emotional connections in debates very much helped "lightweight, rich boy" John Kennedy defeat an incumbent Vice President in 1960 and "dangerous, dunce" Ronald Reagan to annihilate a sitting President in 1980.
mercfan3



Joined: 23 Nov 2004
Posts: 19725



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/24/16 1:49 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Hillary felt the need to help the moderators fact check..

http://www.politicususa.com/2016/09/23/hillary-clinton-drops-debate-bomb-trump-releasing-19-pages-fact-checked-lies.html



_________________
“Anyone point out that a Donald Trump anagram is ‘Lord Dampnut’”- Colin Mochrie
justintyme



Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 8407
Location: Northfield, MN


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/24/16 2:02 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

mercfan3 wrote:
Hillary felt the need to help the moderators fact check..

http://www.politicususa.com/2016/09/23/hillary-clinton-drops-debate-bomb-trump-releasing-19-pages-fact-checked-lies.html

LMFAO. Hopefully the moderators do their job and not just let him make whatever claims he wants on things that are objectively false.



_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
GlennMacGrady



Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 8151
Location: Heisenberg


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/24/16 6:48 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

BuzzFeed:

Quote:
Gennifer Flowers, the former model who had an extramarital affair with Bill Clinton in the 1980s, says she’ll accept an invitation from Donald Trump to sit in the front row of Monday’s presidential debate, according to an assistant.



cthskzfn



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 12851
Location: In a world where a PSYCHOpath like Trump isn't potus.


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/24/16 8:52 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

TNZ


13-yr old girl who is suing Donald Trump for rape will be sitting in the front row at the debate.



_________________
Silly, stupid white people might be waking up.
mercfan3



Joined: 23 Nov 2004
Posts: 19725



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/24/16 8:53 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

cthskzfn wrote:
TNZ


13-yr old girl who is suing Donald Trump for rape will be sitting in the front row at the debate.


Damn..they're getting dirty.

But it begs the question...why isn't more being made about the alleged rape of a 13 year old by one of our presidential candidates.



_________________
“Anyone point out that a Donald Trump anagram is ‘Lord Dampnut’”- Colin Mochrie
tfan



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 9543



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/24/16 8:59 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

This article http://nypost.com/2016/09/24/gennifer-flowers-will-be-sitting-front-row-at-first-debate/ quotes Flower's personal assistant as saying that she will be there. Personal assistant - Jennifer Flowers is doing all right. That article has this quote:

Quote:
“Prepping for a presidential debate from a communications standpoint is one of the hardest things in the world to do,” Democratic consultant Dan Gerstein said. “You have to know your own policies, your opponent’s vulnerabilities, what your message is, and how to play defense.”


Trump denied very calling Marco Rubio "Mark Zuckerberg's personal senator", something that was on his website, at a debate. And he also bellowed at a debate that he would get Zuckerberg and Silicon Valley CEOs all the foreign workers they wanted by whatever visa means necessary, despite his website calling for H1-B visas to be lowered. So if "knowing your own policy" is important it doesn't bode well for Trump. And apparently Trump is not concerned with knowing his own policy:

Quote:
Trump’s advisers are worried he’s doing too little to prepare.
The mogul has skipped reading policy briefings, eschewed mock debates, and turned away two GOP operatives who offered to help prep him for free, said three sources close to the campaign.


justintyme



Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 8407
Location: Northfield, MN


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/24/16 9:07 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Trump is disgusting on so many levels.



_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
GlennMacGrady



Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 8151
Location: Heisenberg


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/24/16 10:17 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

tfan wrote:
This article http://nypost.com/2016/09/24/gennifer-flowers-will-be-sitting-front-row-at-first-debate/ quotes Flower's personal assistant as saying that she will be there. Personal assistant - Jennifer Flowers is doing all right. That article has this quote:

Quote:
“Prepping for a presidential debate from a communications standpoint is one of the hardest things in the world to do,” Democratic consultant Dan Gerstein said. “You have to know your own policies, your opponent’s vulnerabilities, what your message is, and how to play defense.”


Trump denied very calling Marco Rubio "Mark Zuckerberg's personal senator", something that was on his website, at a debate. And he also bellowed at a debate that he would get Zuckerberg and Silicon Valley CEOs all the foreign workers they wanted by whatever visa means necessary, despite his website calling for H1-B visas to be lowered. So if "knowing your own policy" is important it doesn't bode well for Trump. And apparently Trump is not concerned with knowing his own policy:

Quote:
Trump’s advisers are worried he’s doing too little to prepare.
The mogul has skipped reading policy briefings, eschewed mock debates, and turned away two GOP operatives who offered to help prep him for free, said three sources close to the campaign.


The NY Post article is sourced from the BuzzFeed article. I'll believe Gennifer Flowers is at the debate when I see it. If she is there, she'll probably get airtime from the media, which she can use to trash Bill as a sexual predator and Hillary as an anti-feminist enabler.

Please note that the sourced comments about Trump's lack of policy preparation are coming from a Democrat consultant.

Are you suggesting that Trump's unfamiliarity with his own policies somehow cost him in the Republican debates? That's ludicrous. He slaughtered all his opponents in the debates and primary voting -- "the greatest team of Republican candidates ever assembled."

Yes, in one early debate almost a year ago, he did contradict his new website on a matter relating to legal (H1-B) immigration. Hardly anyone noticed it -- except you and Jeff Sessions -- and Trump attempted to backtrack the next day.

More importantly, that was all long ago, before he had any sort of policy team assembled on immigration or anything else. Over the ensuing year, he now has a very strong team on immigration and many other policy areas. HERE is his current immigration policy, both as to illegal and legal immigrants, which is far too detailed for the average voter or (a fortiori) journalist to digest and comprehend.

I personally wish Trump and Hillary would both come out very forcefully in favor of drastically reduced legal immigration. Economically, socially and culturally, this country does not need any more population, especially uneducated, illiterate, unskilled and poverty-stricken hordes from other countries.

As to the unsourced claims that Trump is not preparing for the debates, that's not what I hear on daily TV from people in his inner circle such as Rudy Giuliani, Dr. Ben Carson, Ivanka Trump and Mike Pence. They do confirm that he's not using anyone as a Hillary surrogate in mock debates. But that's only one way to prepare. For example, he's been reported to be using sophisticated video analytics to build a "psychological profile" of all of Hillary's debate performances over the past 16 years. See, e.g.:

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/trump-builds-clinton-profile-debate-228578
mercfan3



Joined: 23 Nov 2004
Posts: 19725



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/24/16 10:29 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

His camp has likely been leaking the "not preparing, going to improv" thing in order to lower expectations.

It's what Maher said, this is like facing a dog in a spelling Bee. You might know all the words, but everyone is going to be more impressed that the dog didn't shit on the stage.



_________________
“Anyone point out that a Donald Trump anagram is ‘Lord Dampnut’”- Colin Mochrie
GlennMacGrady



Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 8151
Location: Heisenberg


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/24/16 11:24 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

mercfan3 wrote:
His camp has likely been leaking the "not preparing, going to improv" thing in order to lower expectations.

It's what Maher said, this is like facing a dog in a spelling Bee. You might know all the words, but everyone is going to be more impressed that the dog didn't shit on the stage.


The first is possible and the second a funny line.

More seriously about problems on the stage, Hillary will be hurt badly if she has one of her extended coughing fits or suffers one of her "seizures". To prevent those things she might be heavily medicated, which will carry other performance risks.

Lots of unpredictable balls will be bouncing around that court.
tfan



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 9543



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/25/16 12:24 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

GlennMacGrady wrote:


Please note that the sourced comments about Trump's lack of policy preparation are coming from a Democrat consultant.


experts who have been through the process call his decision to skip time-intensive mock debates a mistake.

"I think he's putting himself at an incredible disadvantage," said Brett O'Donnell, a Republican strategist and veteran debate coach who compared Trump's decision to a football team failing to scrimmage.

Quote:
Are you suggesting that Trump's unfamiliarity with his own policies somehow cost him in the Republican debates? That's ludicrous. He slaughtered all his opponents in the debates and primary voting -- "the greatest team of Republican candidates ever assembled."


Not having familiarity with his own policies has been raised by others as problematic. I merely pointed out that he has demonstrated a lack of knowledge in the past. No one called Trump on contradicting his website when he shouted he get all the foreign workers Zuckerberg craves so that would have had no effect at that debate. I think Clinton will be better prepared to note contradictions. He initially denied he had called Rubio "Zuckerberg's personal senator" and the moderator was unprepared for that and backed down. When she brought up the contradiction later it was not done in an effective way and greatly minimized the damage.

I don't know that it can be said that the debates hurt or helped Trump or had no effect. He had a plurality of voters before they started and still only had a plurality after they finished. Rather than the 16 opponents making it more difficult, I think they made it easier for him. He only needed a plurality to win, unlike Clinton, which hid his high negatives. The multiple candidate debates is also not full preparation for a one on one "debate" (more like a joint press conference). Clinton has had something like 10 one on one debates between Sanders and Obama and had others in her Senate campaign.

Quote:

Yes, in one early debate almost a year ago, he did contradict his new website on a matter relating to legal (H1-B) immigration. Hardly anyone noticed it -- except you and Jeff Sessions -- and Trump attempted to backtrack the next day.


The phrase went on Trump's website on August 16th. Trump denied it was there on October 28th. He had over two months to memorize the two pages Jeff Sessions had written on his website. But even worse, he apparently let Sessions put stuff there that he didn't agree with. The fact that he backtracked just makes you wonder what his core beliefs are. I think that he is only against illegal immigration - and even then he wants touchback amnesty - and he is fully in favor of the policy of bringing in foreigners to take tech jobs. I have heard him multiple times bemoan the fact that some foreign students can't get visas to take American jobs and have to return to their homeland.

Quote:
More importantly, that was all long ago, before he had any sort of policy team assembled on immigration or anything else. Over the ensuing year, he now has a very strong team on immigration and many other policy areas. HERE is his current immigration policy, both as to illegal and legal immigrants, which is far too detailed for the average voter or (a fortiori) journalist to digest and comprehend.


I take your point that the average person is not that concerned with details. It is more likely the debate is won on the way the candidates project themselves and not on detailed policy statements.

I can't remember what it said verbatim, but I don't see any noticeable changes on his website regarding immigration. It appears to me to be what he had in August 2015. I like what it says though, so I hope Trump has some intention of trying to enact it if elected.

Quote:
I personally wish Trump and Hillary would both come out very forcefully in favor of drastically reduced legal immigration. Economically, socially and culturally, this country does not need any more population, especially uneducated, illiterate, unskilled and poverty-stricken hordes from other countries.


I am with you 110% on that. But I sadly feel that Trump has made infinite immigration an even more sacred cow for most people. The press, due to their policy against saying "illegal" has continually said Trump is "anti-immigrant" and "anti-immigration" which causes anti-Trump folks to celebrate legal and illegal immigration even more and politicians like Clinton and Obama have taken that ball and run with it. Clinton would not be against it unless we faced Great Depression era levels of unemployment (a time when it was lowered - but even then - not stopped).

Quote:
As to the unsourced claims that Trump is not preparing for the debates, that's not what I hear on daily TV from people in his inner circle such as Rudy Giuliani, Dr. Ben Carson, Ivanka Trump and Mike Pence. They do confirm that he's not using anyone as a Hillary surrogate in mock debates. But that's only one way to prepare. For example, he's been reported to be using sophisticated video analytics to build a "psychological profile" of all of Hillary's debate performances over the past 16 years. See, e.g.:

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/trump-builds-clinton-profile-debate-228578


Interesting, wasn't aware of that. Thanks for the info.


Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 15691
Location: OREGON (in my heart)


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/26/16 12:24 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

pilight wrote:
Trump needs to be presidential. If he can project gravitas and make people believe he's a serious person ready to do a serious job, he'll win the debates and the election.


PILIGHTTT! You and your sense of humor!! Laughing

One of the simplest-but-profound analyses I heard recently came from David Brooks (and I paraphrase...): "Trump succeeded in the primary debates by repeatedly spouting T-shirt clichés and bumper sticker slogans. That won't work for 90 minutes against Hillary".

Now, the Mark Cuban invitation was brilliant. That Donald would respond with Flowers as an equivalent gesture is every bit as mentally sound as Donald himself is. Base and sexist. (By the way, is anyone else seeing the Hillary ads that we're getting in PA? The ones with adolescent girls in front of mirrors, and Donald's voice reiterating his quotes about "She's an ugly fat pig", and "No flat-chested woman can be a 10", among others. Oy!)

Of course, with Fine Upstanding Intelligent Americans of THIS ilk, I'm afraid I'm tempted to concur with ckthskz: Hil is skrewed.

Quote:
Miller added: “I don’t think there was any racism until Obama got elected. We never had problems like this … Now, with the people with the guns, and shooting up neighborhoods, and not being responsible citizens, that’s a big change, and I think that’s the philosophy that Obama has perpetuated on America.”



_________________
Oregon: Go Ducks!
"Inévitablement, les canards voleront"
tfan



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 9543



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/26/16 2:00 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Howee wrote:
That Donald would respond with Flowers as an equivalent gesture is every bit as mentally sound as Donald himself is. Base and sexist.


How is it sexist?

Quote:

(By the way, is anyone else seeing the Hillary ads that we're getting in PA? The ones with adolescent girls in front of mirrors, and Donald's voice reiterating his quotes about "She's an ugly fat pig", and "No flat-chested woman can be a 10", among others. Oy!)


I am in California, which is solidly blue and Trump has no chance of winning and they have been showing ads like that, if not that one. Some of them from the Clinton campaign, some from SuperPACs and some from a group that purports to be some public interest group or something. I recently read an article that talked about that - you can give what is actually a political advertisement for a candidate, but can pretend that you are doing it as a public service message for a cause or something like that. I am not sure what the advantages of that are versus a SuperPAC.


mercfan3



Joined: 23 Nov 2004
Posts: 19725



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/26/16 9:04 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

It's sexist because he is equating her husbands faults with her's.

It's also just gross. Hillary was the victim in that scenario (Flowers/Bill). I mean, I was kind of hoping he would do it because it looks horrible on Trump, and I doubt it'll have much effect on Hillary.



_________________
“Anyone point out that a Donald Trump anagram is ‘Lord Dampnut’”- Colin Mochrie
Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 15691
Location: OREGON (in my heart)


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/26/16 9:44 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

mercfan3 wrote:
It's sexist because he is equating her husbands faults with her's.

It's also just gross. Hillary was the victim in that scenario (Flowers/Bill). I mean, I was kind of hoping he would do it because it looks horrible on Trump, and I doubt it'll have much effect on Hillary.


Precisely.

Cuban = Financial/Business Equivalent (but NON-supporter) of Trump's. Flowers = Negative reminder of sex scandal from ancient past. She'd have been a more logical choice if Clinton had invited, say, Ivanka Trump holding a Marla Maples picture, or even Rosie O'Donnell.

Yeah, Flowers would have added a perfect accent to the entire tableau: Hillary's rising to the Leader of The Free World, unimpeded by the debris of her husband's past that Trump may fling in her way.



_________________
Oregon: Go Ducks!
"Inévitablement, les canards voleront"
GlennMacGrady



Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 8151
Location: Heisenberg


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/26/16 10:00 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I predict the first debate winner will be:

-- Clinton, according to Clinton supporters and surrogates

-- Trump, according to Trump supporters and surrogates

-- Clinton, according to MSM TV pundits except for a few on Fox

-- Trump, according to most instant online polls
tfan



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 9543



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/26/16 1:00 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

mercfan3 wrote:
It's sexist because he is equating her husbands faults with her's.


He's mainly trying to get under her skin, as she is his with her inviting Mark Cuban. She is very unflappable, and I don't think one of Clinton's mistresses would faze her as I think she knew about his behavior.


Quote:
It's also just gross. Hillary was the victim in that scenario (Flowers/Bill).


Flowers and Clinton were together for 12 years. It is highly unlikely that Hillary didn't know about it. Much more likely she condoned it.

Quote:
I mean, I was kind of hoping he would do it because it looks horrible on Trump, and I doubt it'll have much effect on Hillary.


The fact that she invited Mark Cuban along with partisanship would have canceled out most of it. The only people outraged would have been solid Clinton supporters.


justintyme



Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 8407
Location: Northfield, MN


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/26/16 1:22 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

tfan wrote:
Flowers and Clinton were together for 12 years. It is highly unlikely that Hillary didn't know about it. Much more likely she condoned it.

Two things. One, that is a very large assumption that has absolutely no evidence to back it up. Plenty of long term affairs have occurred without the spouse ever knowing. I have seen that first hand in my own extended family. To assume that she had to have known is fairly insulting to the injured party.

Second, if we were to accept that she did know this would be even stupider. If she knew and had allowed it or didn't care, then why is it of any relevance at all to anyone, much less her. If they had/have an open relationship that is absolutely no one's business but theirs (to be clear I am not saying they do/did, as it is a dumb and inconsequential thing to speculate about).



_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
tfan



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 9543



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/26/16 1:51 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

justintyme wrote:
tfan wrote:
Flowers and Clinton were together for 12 years. It is highly unlikely that Hillary didn't know about it. Much more likely she condoned it.

Two things. One, that is a very large assumption that has absolutely no evidence to back it up. Plenty of long term affairs have occurred without the spouse ever knowing. I have seen that first hand in my own extended family. To assume that she had to have known is fairly insulting to the injured party.


I take your point in that I have no data on what percent of affairs go undetected. That is, is it a small minority? But I don't think I need evidence to say what I feel is most likely in such a long affair with a governor. I didn't say what definitely happened.

Quote:

Second, if we were to accept that she did know this would be even stupider. If she knew and had allowed it or didn't care, then why is it of any relevance at all to anyone, much less her. If they had/have an open relationship that is absolutely no one's business but theirs (to be clear I am not saying they do/did, as it is a dumb and inconsequential thing to speculate about).


You could make the same "what business is it of ours" for an affair as for an open marriage. But Clinton's affairs became big news in the 1992 election, so big that 60 minutes had a special show for him so he could semi-address it. I would assume that was all based on the "character issue". An open marriage would be subject to the same scrutiny. Not directly related to governing, but something that would bother people, even if it shouldn't because it isn't illegal. But people have a right to vote for who they are comfortable with. There is nothing about calling Rosie O'Donnell fat and ugly or saying women can't be tens if they have small breasts that means Trump can't govern. He isn't going to translate those comments into legislation. But Clinton uses those as reasons not to vote for him.




Last edited by tfan on 09/26/16 3:18 pm; edited 1 time in total
mercfan3



Joined: 23 Nov 2004
Posts: 19725



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/26/16 2:16 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I think Hillary knew of Bill's affairs. There was an article where she was in a meeting about it while Bill was running for office.

That being said, it doesn't make her not the victim. Sure, it could be an open relationship, but we don't know that it is..so it's just as likely that she didn't appreciate the affair, but decided to stay with Bill for other reasons. (He told her this would be the last one and she loved him, for Chelsea, she sees his affairs as a flaw in him but not one that is worth divorcing him over, or if you are cynical that they are essentially business partners..regardless, she's still the victim. Because even if he didn't hurt her with the actual affair, his business being out in the open is at the very least, embarrassing.)


Trump, IMO, has to be careful. If he's too much of an ass to her, she becomes likable because she's seen as a victim. If he gets stupid, and we see badass Hillary (the one that showed up to the 11 hour interrogation), that only helps her.

That's the one thing Hillary's gender has going for her. The one demographic not in her favor, white men..could easily have some negative reactions to what Trump does to Hillary tonight. (If he gets out of line).

Anyway, the problem with Trump's comments is that we would have a president that is objectifying women at a disgusting level. That makes him unfit to be president (not necessarily unfit to govern. Other characteristics make him unfit to govern.). Clinton's love life is personal and should be private, a president's comments are not.



_________________
“Anyone point out that a Donald Trump anagram is ‘Lord Dampnut’”- Colin Mochrie
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » Area 51 All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
Page 1 of 8

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB 2.0.17 © 2001- 2004 phpBB Group
phpBB Template by Vjacheslav Trushkin