Hillary Sucks.

[roguetoaster]

Thats not what I said, Seems that you have some kind of fundamental hate for rich people, why is that??

Which part didn't you say, about being operators, or the part that you clearly didn't say, about euthanasia?

Do show me where I said that I hated rich people, or what/how you arrived at that conclusion?

I was indicating that it's difficult to get to the top without damaging a few other lives en route. I don't even mildly dislike you either sleeve, even if I think your views are often completely wrong and even dangerous. But I do wish you'd elaborate on some of your answers so that I could understand your reasoning, rather than just hear your rhetoric on repeat.

[BraveUlysses]

i can understand the hate for hillary, but if you read up on the political platform trump endorses it is conservative. he may be an asshat but if he gets 1/2 of his platform it will be a huge improvement over the last 8 years of hillary and what's his name

oh yea, let me say one more thing, fuck warren buffet and the horse he rode in on. somehow he's held up as the white knight of investing but he doesn't play by the same rules.

trump is not a conservative; not fiscally nor in regards to social policies.

[gwb72tii]

This thread is devolving. Hillary sucks... we know. Trump sucks more (can't believe that's possible)... we know.

I'll say it again... both of these candidates are terrible examples of what can happen in a political system where big business has access to the law makers (fuck you lobbyists and Citizens United). Neither of them will be "good" for the country, but one will, hopefully at least, be no worse than we've had. The other is an nonredeemable turd who has managed to mobilize a group of citizenry who either want our political system to become a reality TV show, or want to send a message that they are willing to send literally anyone up to the plate (no matter what they say or do) who isn't a part of the established political arena. I understand their frustration with the stagnation and brokenness of it all, but there is no way Trump should be anywhere near a political office. I wouldn't trust him as School Board President much less as POTUS.

If any of you want to try to send a message, vote for anyone else on the ballot. You most likely won't win (like really, 99% won't win) but at least the numbers will be shown. Your list of choices can be found below. Johnson probably will have the biggest chance of taking votes from both parties so I'll probably go that way. I don't agree with all of his positions (no shit, there is no perfect candidate for everyone) but I'd feel better with him holding the highest office in the land over either of the major party candidates.

http://www.politics1.com/p2016.htm

i can understand the hate for hillary, but if you read up on the political platform trump endorses it is conservative. he may be an asshat but if he gets 1/2 of his platform it will be a huge improvement over the last 8 years of hillary and what's his name

oh yea, let me say one more thing, fuck warren buffet and the horse he rode in on. somehow he's held up as the white knight of investing but he doesn't play by the same rules.

[mrsleeve]

So it's okay to be wealthy, just to not get there by lying to other people. With very limited exceptions, truly wealthy people have done more than one absolutely awful thing to get where they are today.

So it's only fair, if one side of the current political race gets condemnation, the other ought to as well for being just as much of a POS.

Thats not what I said, Seems that you have some kind of fundamental hate for rich people, why is that??

[Schnitzer318is]

So, here's to one more shovel full!

This thread is devolving. Hillary sucks... we know. Trump sucks more (can't believe that's possible)... we know.

I'll say it again... both of these candidates are terrible examples of what can happen in a political system where big business has access to the law makers (fuck you lobbyists and Citizens United). Neither of them will be "good" for the country, but one will, hopefully at least, be no worse than we've had. The other is an nonredeemable turd who has managed to mobilize a group of citizenry who either want our political system to become a reality TV show, or want to send a message that they are willing to send literally anyone up to the plate (no matter what they say or do) who isn't a part of the established political arena. I understand their frustration with the stagnation and brokenness of it all, but there is no way Trump should be anywhere near a political office. I wouldn't trust him as School Board President much less as POTUS.

If any of you want to try to send a message, vote for anyone else on the ballot. You most likely won't win (like really, 99% won't win) but at least the numbers will be shown. Your list of choices can be found below. Johnson probably will have the biggest chance of taking votes from both parties so I'll probably go that way. I don't agree with all of his positions (no shit, there is no perfect candidate for everyone) but I'd feel better with him holding the highest office in the land over either of the major party candidates.

http://www.politics1.com/p2016.htm

[roguetoaster]

Though the D's have perfected it to an art form and the Clinton's have elevated it to near perfection beyond that for both personal gain (wealth) and accumulation of power and influence ...

So it's okay to be wealthy, just to not get there by lying to other people. With very limited exceptions, truly wealthy people have done more than one absolutely awful thing to get where they are today.

So it's only fair, if one side of the current political race gets condemnation, the other ought to as well for being just as much of a POS.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...-are-accurate/

Any circumstantial evidence is nothing different than their days since Arkansas. A pattern of government, or lack of it (no oversight for her department when she was Secretary of State? What?) abuse to make sure there's enough plausible deniability. It's like saying that Trump cannot possibly be a narcissist because he hasn't taken a narcissist test. She lies in front of the camera but some how we can't believe that she lies behind secret and close doors. Please NSA, release the emails that you have and be honest. Why do we have to plea to Russia, China or some hackers to release them?

Anyways, this book can't possible be wrong, he didn't intend for it to be lolol. Bring on the lawsuits Clintons! They just keep skating on by because of what we now need to call the "Clinton Privilege".

The Clintons have been and will continue to be political operators. Why is this still surprising to you or anyone? As such, they know when to sue (which is difficult to do as a public figure) and when to ignore another piss ant moron who would absolutely cream his pants if they did sue. Does this disqualify one from a political position? Of course not, and it probably makes them more likely to be elected when you consider how elections are organized and funded.

Frankly, I don't know why I or anyone even bothers to continue this "discussion" as we know that dozy thinks whatever it is that he actually thinks, sleeve pretty much thinks that anyone who does agree with his view point is an irredeemable idiot who should probably be euthanized for the good of society, and everyone else is just stoking the fire. So, here's to one more shovel full!

[Dozyproductions]

again, this is based on a widely discredited book. It's not even new.

I get that Clinton does and says things that make us want to smack our foreheads in disgust - but this is purely in the territory of wild speculation and outright falsification.

Like assuming Trump isn't releasing his taxes because of ties to the Russians. I think that's pretty unlikely, and I'm not exactly a fan of Trump.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/04/26/11-explosive-clinton-cash-facts-mainstream-media-confirm-are-accurate/

Any circumstantial evidence is nothing different than their days since Arkansas. A pattern of government, or lack of it (no oversight for her department when she was Secretary of State? What?) abuse to make sure there's enough plausible deniability. It's like saying that Trump cannot possibly be a narcissist because he hasn't taken a narcissist test. She lies in front of the camera but some how we can't believe that she lies behind secret and close doors. Please NSA, release the emails that you have and be honest. Why do we have to plea to Russia, China or some hackers to release them?

Anyways, this book can't possible be wrong, he didn't intend for it to be lolol. Bring on the lawsuits Clintons! They just keep skating on by because of what we now need to call the "Clinton Privilege".

[mrsleeve]

I guess if you repeat a lie enough times though, people will believe it.. especially if it confirms their pre-conceived notions.

This was proven by the Wilson admin via Creel, Bernays, and Lippman, nearly a 100 years ago and practiced by both sides since. Though the D's have perfected it to an art form and the Clinton's have elevated it to near perfection beyond that for both personal gain (wealth) and accumulation of power and influence ...

[marshallnoise]

Regardless, if she gets elected, I'm moving to Benghazi.... At least she'll leave me alone there.

Sent from my XT1064 using Tapatalk

10/10

Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk

[15Michaeljoseph]

Regardless, if she gets elected, I'm moving to Benghazi.... At least she'll leave me alone there.

Sent from my XT1064 using Tapatalk

[nando]

That was after the "rumor" was started at Faux news. Also, it doesn't say anything about there being an investigation.

[djjerme]

https://www.scribd.com/document/319384834/IRS-Response-Clinton-Foundation-July-2016

It was the IRS.

[nando]

That's false. It's something that was said on Faux news with no evidence - there has been no investigation. I guess if you repeat a lie enough times though, people will believe it.. especially if it confirms their pre-conceived notions.

[M-technik-3]

That and the supposed FBI has the ongoing possible investigation of the Clinton Foundation.

[DEV0 E30]

While most of it is speculation using confirmed times of Bill being paid to speak during Hillary's time as Sec of State, it may not be fair to say it's a discredited book. That would mean all of it us untrue. There were changes made and corrections made, but just as I'm not going to believe everything I read, you can't throw the whole book out. Quite a few respected newspapers were able to find unfavorable points to be true throughout what was covered in the book.

I won't blindly think one way or another. Even if it is all speculation, her flipping of major issues... I'm not jiving with that. It usually did benefit a Clinton Foundation supporter though. Even if I disregard the coincidence there, it's about principles.

I'm not jiving with her ability to flip on previous important principles that her party said they'd do differently, then boom, changes the tune to completely disregard her previous position that was so ingrained in her beliefs and/or party. Would I ever say the republican party is better? Hell no, I'm sick of the mud slinging on both sides and America being the split voice when in reality both parties change their tune to suit their need, disregarding their "beliefs". Hillary tries to weasel out of the lies when she's been recorded saying something else, using lawyer speak or deflecting. I can't believe in a leader like that, even if you disregard the possibility of profiting on terrible things in regions that didn't really see the help they were believing they were getting.