What's full fucking retard is to not understand what American culture is....it's a conglomeration of everyone else. It's the best and worst, it's the good and the bad and the ugly of the pretty much every other country in the world.

You have far too much hubris for me RF...I've never left north America and I don't need to, to know that.

You're describing my ancestors when they first arrived....they didn't know english...

I think this is an old argument made by birthers made since the beginning of time. I think you need accept that people bringing their culture here changes our culture as much as it does theirs.

I think you care about the laws that only benefit you. No one here is arguing that they shouldn't pony up and pay their fair share in addition to following our laws...but illegals are here now. You can do one of two things: 1) you can ship them back to where they came from OR 2) you accept the ones that are here and find them a path to citizenship so they can start paying fair share and adhering to the laws.

I think in the end though, most conservatives don't want them to contribute....they just want them gone. Because there is one thing a conservative never wants...and that's change.

You said it yourself,

And I think there lies the most telling statement of all...it's your culture that you believe is superior and that everyone else should adhere to...I can only guess as to why...but this is exactly why the rest of the world finds Americans so annoying. Maybe because 'you were here first' or 'America is great at making money.' Whatever the case, this is exactly the aspect of American culture that I find repulsive. The hubris of the average American, the Khardashian culture, it's disturbing to me to see the lack of self-awareness that seems to be sense of pride of Americans.

You've been saying that since the election, as though there's some profound epiphany we are all supposed to have about Donald Trump being president. What is there to understand? It's not rocket science. People like charismatic people no matter how substance-less they are.

a map from the American catholic.....wow.....who gives a shit?

I'm still not sure what you're arguing here....is this the beginning of an argument that basically states the physical size of your state should dictate your influence on the election? If so, Montana and Alaska should have 100 electoral votes.

California has 55 EVs....and they deserve them all.

Furthermore, Hillary got 3 million more popular votes than Drumpf...whether that matters in the EC or not is not debatable....but it sure does matter in general.

Are you purporting that losing the popular vote by that margin but still winning the EC makes this an obvious mandate for President Drumpf?

Are you suggesting that somehow California's population, larger than any other state, shouldn't be allocated the number of EVs it has? That a representative democracy would be better served if they weren't proportionately represented?

Are you arguing that the misleading map from Catholic America...the map that treats the physical size of the country/state/county as the metric for showing you how the country voted. The same map that shows Cook County, Illinois to be an ant hill but the state of South Dakota and Wyoming as mountains next to said ant hill....when the combined populations of both states are about 10% of cook county AT BEST!

C'mon man...show me those critical thinking skill.....