All Things US Politics Related: Biden pardons Hunter

[dude2014]

As much as I like the Guy, his pack of cards always seem to have too many boogeys. I do not trust the Clinton pair.

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

^Boy, moms just called and was complaining about Trump's comments during the dinner, yes

Apparently he went way over the line? and even got booed? Not surprised.

Kinda burnt out on Trump for a while so, didn't/couldn't watch.

More fun watching his supporters defend his constant indefensibility

his speech was cringe worthy. He made some jokes that got lots of boos

News reporters were saying they don't remember anyone getting booed at that event ever in history.

[baigan]

https://youtu.be/o-tNP1s69uA

The end is hilarious, From like around 4:00-4:42

[Redman]

^Boy, moms just called and was complaining about Trump's comments during the dinner, yes

Apparently he went way over the line? and even got booed? Not surprised.

Kinda burnt out on Trump for a while so, didn't/couldn't watch.

More fun watching his supporters defend his constant indefensibility

Both candidates need the other to justify their vote.
You voting X cuz yuh hate Y.
Clinton and Trump both have negative ratings in the 70% range.

I think it's a natural result of a two party system putting up such crappy candidates...forcing the population to vote for the lesser of two evils...

I see plenty similarities between Our dilemma in the last elections to the US now.

[RASC]

You guys not realising the major caveats here... He's not a politician. Meaning he's PUREPOSLEY NOT PLAYING BY THEIR RULES... He's doing it his way, and that's what people love.

[De Dragon]

Any of you guys actually realize what happened in the last debate? I don't know if it was just me, but Trump seemed more composed and Hillary came off as a total beyotch. Essentially he let Hillary make herself into a bitter sarcasm machine, and he is like.. "OK.. take win you bullying psychopath woman". Though it would be considered a "Loss" in terms of a debate perspective, Trump actually came off as more human and restrained.

It appears that you watched a different debate. There were instances where you could see Clinton boiling, but visibly controlling her reaction. That "nasty woman" comment, coupled with the reality show like comment about accepting the election results, derailed Trump's debate totally.

[daas]

Anyone watched them roast each other last night? lol these two really don't like each other.

[RBphoto]

You guys not realising the major caveats here... He's not a politician. Meaning he's PUREPOSLEY NOT PLAYING BY THEIR RULES... He's doing it his way, and that's what people love.

Well somebody gets it. Watched the whole thing now and TBH... I don't see it as a crushing defeat for Trump. Though Hillary would be called the clear "Winner" of the debate, I believe people are watching this through their filter of Trump is a (insert bad word here) and Hillary is some goody two shoes. Many of the things that they are calling a clear indication that Trump is a baby, I call not committing to a rigged system, which is the way to beat it. Trump says the electoral process is rigged. Why would somebody commit to say they would accept the results of the election if they bloody said it was rigged? I would also wait and look for fraud. If I find evidence I reserve the right to say it was bloody rigged. I stand by my statement that Trump is not as bad a candidate that people are making him out to be and Hillary is not the lesser of two evils, but has quite a lot of baggage herself.

[The_Honourable]

What i find interesting is "fact checking". There is an obvious bias by mainstream media to fact check Trump on every turn. Now if Trump is wrong and the sources back it up, no problem. The thing is, Hillary doesn't get the same degree of scrutiny giving the impression that Hillary is honest and doesn't need to be "fact checked" as often.

Any of you guys actually realize what happened in the last debate? I don't know if it was just me, but Trump seemed more composed and Hillary came off as a total beyotch. Essentially he let Hillary make herself into a bitter sarcasm machine, and he is like.. "OK.. take win you bullying psychopath woman". Though it would be considered a "Loss" in terms of a debate perspective, Trump actually came off as more human and restrained.

It appears that you watched a different debate. There were instances where you could see Clinton boiling, but visibly controlling her reaction. That "nasty woman" comment, coupled with the reality show like comment about accepting the election results, derailed Trump's debate totally.

Agreed!

[The_Honourable]

What i find interesting is "fact checking". There is an obvious bias by mainstream media to fact check Trump on every turn. Now if Trump is wrong and the sources back it up, no problem. The thing is, Hillary doesn't get the same degree of scrutiny giving the impression that Hillary is honest and doesn't need to be "fact checked" as often. Even if one of Hillary's statements is proven to be false, the media would use words like "Not Really", "Not Exactly", "Unlikely" etc. If Trump is wrong, they will say outright "False" or "Misleading".

Any of you guys actually realize what happened in the last debate? I don't know if it was just me, but Trump seemed more composed and Hillary came off as a total beyotch. Essentially he let Hillary make herself into a bitter sarcasm machine, and he is like.. "OK.. take win you bullying psychopath woman". Though it would be considered a "Loss" in terms of a debate perspective, Trump actually came off as more human and restrained.

It appears that you watched a different debate. There were instances where you could see Clinton boiling, but visibly controlling her reaction. That "nasty woman" comment, coupled with the reality show like comment about accepting the election results, derailed Trump's debate totally.

Agreed!

[Miktay]

I scored the topics as follows:

The 2nd Amendment - TIE

So, closing the loopholes that allow persons on the NO-FLY list to purchase firearms and also closing loopholes that allow persons to purchase firearms at gun shows and online, with no background checks, makes as much sense as no new legislation?

Real criminals on the no-fly list already have guns. They dont have 2 go thru background check or apply 4 carry permits.

The people whom thiz 'closing of loopholes' would impede are law abiding citizens who want 2 purchase firearms.

Open Borders - WINNER: Trump

She definitely wants to let in more immigrants, but she doesn't want "open borders"

This is hard 2 ascertain. Politicians say things and never follow thru.

But she indicated thiz inna speech in 2013.

My dream is a hemispheric common market, with open trade and open borders, some time in the future with energy that is as green and sustainable as we can get it, powering growth and opportunity for every person in the hemisphere
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/927

The fact is though, there are less Mexicans going over the border than ever. In fact there are more going back to Mexico

http://www.pewhispanic.org/2015/11/19/m ... o-the-u-s/

Economy - TIE

You're saying that going back to "trickle down economics" of bigger tax cuts for the rich, ending the estate tax and basically the economic strategy of George W Bush/Republicans, is a "tie" with Obama's plan so far? (which is the foundation for Hillary's plan) And we haven't even begun to talk about paying for Trump's "wall" and how much it will cost. Especially since Mexico isn't paying for sh!t.

Moot point. Under Regan, GW Bush and the Obama admin the debt increased.
https://www.thebalance.com/us-debt-by-p ... nt-3306296

Fitness to become President - WINNER: Clinton

Clinton Foundation - WINNER: Trump

Really? The Clinton Foundation actually does good work and gets excellent ratings from the charity watchdogs, while the Trump Foundation is used by Trump to buy personal items and use to pay off fines and settle legal matters. Which is highly inappropriate, by the way. However I give this to Trump, only because of the perception that many have of the Clinton Foundation.

Depends where u you get ur info.

Clinton Foundation Is Charity Fraud Of Epic Proportions", Analyst Charges In Stunning Takedown

“It seems like the Clinton Foundation operates as a slush fund for the Clintons,” said Bill Allison, a senior fellow at the Sunlight Foundation, a government watchdog group where progressive Democrat and Fordham Law professor Zephyr Teachout was once an organizing director.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-09-0 ... g-takedown

Rigged Elections - TIE

How is this a tie? Please explain?

Foreign Policy - TIE

Can't comment as Trump has YET to give any details as to what his plan is.

National Debt - TIE

Economists on all sides of the isle all agree his plan would balloon the Debt more than hers. A tie?... really?

Neither candidate appears to understand what it will take 2 reduce the debt or mitigate the off-balance sheet liabilities of the USA. Neither do the so called economists.

[baigan]

https://youtu.be/2TQf_Qyt5nE
Lmao

[shogun]

Real criminals on the no-fly list already have guns. They dont have 2 go thru background check or apply 4 carry permits.

What nonsense is that? Criminals on the No-Fly list? And the second sentence just proved my point

Miktay, persons on the (TSDB) lists aren't necessarily "criminals." Just persons under suspicion of potentially being a threat to National Security. The No-Fly list ban also has provisions that permanently expose persons on the list and the larger TSDB list to background checks, which means the Orlando shooter would have been denied the purchase of an assault rifle, used to kill 49 people.

The people whom thiz 'closing of loopholes' would impede are law abiding citizens who want 2 purchase firearms.

So what if people wait a little longer to purchase a firearm, if it stops even ONE person suspected of being a threat from obtaining one?

Omar Marteen (Orlando shooter) made terrorist threats against co-workers, boasted about knowing suicide bombers, and claimed family ties to al-Qaeda, but was technically a "law abiding citizen." So what does that have to do with anything?

This is hard 2 ascertain. Politicians say things and never follow thru.

But she indicated thiz inna speech in 2013.

My dream is a hemispheric common market, with open trade and open borders, some time in the future with energy that is as green and sustainable as we can get it, powering growth and opportunity for every person in the hemisphere
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/927

Lmao. Just read.

http://www.politifact.com/florida/state ... reate-tot/

Moot point. Under Regan, GW Bush and the Obama admin the debt increased.
https://www.thebalance.com/us-debt-by-p ... nt-3306296

Firstly this was supposed to be specifically about the economy, leaving the deficit and debt to be answered separately. I'll kill two birds with one stone, i guess.

Hillary's plan higher taxes for households above a certain income bracket (Buffet rule)

Tax incentives for companies that have profit-sharing plans.

Raising the minimum wage to $12

Tax penalties to prevent corporations from moving abroad, as well as measures to prevent corporate tax avoidance,

Trumps "plan" so far...

Tax CUTS for top earners

Get rid of the estate tax (which would also only benefit the wealthy)

Raise minimum wage to $10

That's all i could find of his "plan" You be the judge which one seems fair.

Now the debt and deficit...

it's a little misleading to hold Obama accountable for the deficit incurred during his first year of office, because the federal budget for that fiscal year was already set by the prior Administration. President Bush's last budget (FY 2009) created a deficit of $1.16 trillion after subtracting the spending on the Economic Stimulus Act. Most of this addition to the debt occurred after the new President took office, and so should not be attributed to Obama. Lets not also forget Obama also had to finally put Bush's two wars on the books. The fact that they were already approaching 11Trillion in debt before Obama took office and the country was in the grips of a recession/financial crisis.

2009 - Although this was President Bush's last budget, it was implemented during Obama's first year. Congress agreed to add the first year's worth of spending from the Economic Stimulus Act to this.
2010 - Obama's first budget created a $1.587 trillion deficit, the largest in history.
2011 - It contributed $1.3 trillion to the debt.
2012 - The deficit was $1.087 trillion.
2013 - This was the first Obama budget where the deficit, $679 billion, was less than $1 trillion. Thank sequestration, which forced a 10% cut in spending.
2014 - The deficit was $485 billion.
2015 - The deficit fell further, to $438 billion.
2016 - The deficit is projected to be $616 billion
Current Budget - The deficit is projected to be $503 billion.

Now if we both agree that bringing down the deficit, is heading in the right direction to lessening the debt, than at least we agree Obama's plan is heading in the right direction. And he did it with the rabid obstruction of a hostile Republican Congress. Imagine what he could have done with some cooperation?

Depends where u you get ur info.

Clinton Foundation Is Charity Fraud Of Epic Proportions", Analyst Charges In Stunning Takedown

“It seems like the Clinton Foundation operates as a slush fund for the Clintons,” said Bill Allison, a senior fellow at the Sunlight Foundation, a government watchdog group where progressive Democrat and Fordham Law professor Zephyr Teachout was once an organizing director.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-09-0 ... g-takedown

Yes, it does depend on WHERE you get your info, doesn't it?

So, lets look at zerohedge.com...

The website was established in 2009. According to the Boston Business Journal, the website "publishes financial news and opinion, aggregated and original" from a number of writers "who purportedly hail from within the financial industry." Posts on the website are signed "Tyler Durden," a character in the Chuck Palahniuk book and movie Fight Club.

In 2009, shortly after the blog was founded, news reports identified Daniel Ivandjiiski, a Bulgarian-born former hedge-fund analyst who was barred from the industry for insider trading by FINRA in 2008, as the founder of the site, and reported that "Durden" was a pseudonym for Ivandjiiski. One contributor, who spoke to New York magazine after an interview was arranged by Ivandjiiski, said that "up to 40" people were permitted to post under the "Durden" name.

In April 2016, the authors writing as "Durden" on the website were reported by Bloomberg News to be Ivandjiiski, Tim Backshall (a credit derivatives strategist), and Colin Lokey. Lokey, the newest member revealed himself and the other two when he left the site. Ivandjiiski confirmed that the three men "had been the only Tyler Durdens on the payroll" since Lokey joined the site in 2015. On leaving, Lokey said: "I can't be a 24-hour cheerleader for Hezbollah, Moscow, Tehran, Beijing, and Trump anymore. It's wrong. Period. I know it gets you views now, but it will kill your brand over the long run. This isn't a revolution. It's a joke."

So, who is this "analyst" making the charge?

His name is Charles Ortel. He's a Breitbart.com (Far right-winged, white nationalist website) affiliated contributor on their site that has had the Clinton's in his cross hairs for YEARS. Not to mention Breitbart.com dabbles in conspiracy theories of every kind regarding the Clinton's. Ortel's claims about the Clinton Foundation have been ignored by almost every other news outlet (online/mainstream) specifically because of his/their history.


http://www.npr.org/2016/10/17/498154413 ... oundations

http://www.salon.com/2016/10/21/donald- ... 15-report/

[shogun]

You guys not realising the major caveats here... He's not a politician. Meaning he's PUREPOSLEY NOT PLAYING BY THEIR RULES... He's doing it his way, and that's what people love.

Well somebody gets it. Watched the whole thing now and TBH... I don't see it as a crushing defeat for Trump. Though Hillary would be called the clear "Winner" of the debate, I believe people are watching this through their filter of Trump is a (insert bad word here) and Hillary is some goody two shoes. Many of the things that they are calling a clear indication that Trump is a baby, I call not committing to a rigged system, which is the way to beat it. Trump says the electoral process is rigged. Why would somebody commit to say they would accept the results of the election if they bloody said it was rigged? I would also wait and look for fraud. If I find evidence I reserve the right to say it was bloody rigged. I stand by my statement that Trump is not as bad a candidate that people are making him out to be and Hillary is not the lesser of two evils, but has quite a lot of baggage herself.

Do you have ANY idea how hard it would be to "rig the elections?"

You are talking about a conspiracy that would include DOZENS of Republican led/Trump supporting states, being complicit in cheating their own party, out of the elections. Madness.

You asked, why would someone commit and accept the results? Why would someone not at least WAIT until the election was held, gather the PROOF of electoral fraud, THEN present it to the American people?

There has NEVER been a candidate to loosely throw around a serious charge like that in the HISTORY of the elections being held in the US. Not to mention Trumps habit of whining and crying rigged every time things didn't go his way. He did it at the Republican primaries, the Emmy's, even the Olyimpics. Why are you putting faith in his charge now? Especially with not ONE SHRED of evidence?


BTW, i have a feeling RASC trolling us inno. I STILL can't believe RASC not seeing straight through Trump

[shogun]

^Boy, moms just called and was complaining about Trump's comments during the dinner, yes

Apparently he went way over the line? and even got booed? Not surprised.

Kinda burnt out on Trump for a while so, didn't/couldn't watch.

More fun watching his supporters defend his constant indefensibility

his speech was cringe worthy. He made some jokes that got lots of boos

News reporters were saying they don't remember anyone getting booed at that event ever in history.

They're already saying Trump is the first person to lose at that dinner

[baigan]

https://youtu.be/35gzCtLHO3A
Colbert is hilarious

[De Dragon]

You guys not realising the major caveats here... He's not a politician. Meaning he's PUREPOSLEY NOT PLAYING BY THEIR RULES... He's doing it his way, and that's what people love.

Well somebody gets it. Watched the whole thing now and TBH... I don't see it as a crushing defeat for Trump. Though Hillary would be called the clear "Winner" of the debate, I believe people are watching this through their filter of Trump is a (insert bad word here) and Hillary is some goody two shoes. Many of the things that they are calling a clear indication that Trump is a baby, I call not committing to a rigged system, which is the way to beat it. Trump says the electoral process is rigged. Why would somebody commit to say they would accept the results of the election if they bloody said it was rigged? I would also wait and look for fraud. If I find evidence I reserve the right to say it was bloody rigged. I stand by my statement that Trump is not as bad a candidate that people are making him out to be and Hillary is not the lesser of two evils, but has quite a lot of baggage herself.

Do you have ANY idea how hard it would be to "rig the elections?"

You are talking about a conspiracy that would include DOZENS of Republican led/Trump supporting states, being complicit in cheating their own party, out of the elections. Madness.

You asked, why would someone commit and accept the results? Why would someone not at least WAIT until the election was held, gather the PROOF of electoral fraud, THEN present it to the American people?

There has NEVER been a candidate to loosely throw around a serious charge like that in the HISTORY of the elections being held in the US. Not to mention Trumps habit of whining and crying rigged every time things didn't go his way. He did it at the Republican primaries, the Emmy's, even the Olyimpics. Why are you putting faith in his charge now? Especially with not ONE SHRED of evidence?


BTW, i have a feeling RASC trolling us inno. I STILL can't believe RASC not seeing straight through Trump

Trump is simply planning an exit strategy. The thing is in his warped way of thinking, his exit strategy involves the claim that he could only actually lose the election if there was massive electoral fraud. Thus post-election his cry will be "well I lost, but I did say the thing was rigged"

[bluesclues]

Do you have ANY idea how hard it would be to "rig the elections?"

You are talking about a conspiracy that would include DOZENS of Republican led/Trump supporting states, being complicit in cheating their own party, out of the elections. Madness.

Not as hard as u might think. If democrats infiltrated and now hold all the positions in the republican party. Essentially making it Dem 2.0. It may be that that's how it's been for years. It may be that the Dems have had control over the ballot system since Bush jr got his second term.

In fact it may have been happening for years now and media blackout assisted in keeping it from becoming a topic on public airwaves.

Most people cant believe it's possible. But it is. From bid rigging the machines to the hiding and burning of ballots. American elections are the dirtiest theyve ever been, and have been for a while. Imagine if every time someone casts an electronic vote for candidate A, the machine casts 2 votes for candidate b. And if u succeed in deferring to the ballot system in your district that the ballot boxes can be stolen off the premises and stuffed, or entirely replaced by pre-filled boxes containing a falsified voting majority while the real boxes are burnt.







Pretty much saw it all happen with the 2008 elections. The gop sacrificed it's own players to further the democrat ticket and give obama his second term. There is no republican party anymore. Since all the positions that matter are held by democrats.

[bluesclues]

This is from last week.




They get a million each to sabotage their country and they consider it profit.

[MaxPower]

Everyone on this thread loves Trump..

[bluesclues]

Everyone on this thread loves Trump..

Lol.. it's hard to say whether 'the establishment' will select hillary or trump.

Hillary is a warmonger
But trump may be key to improved relations with russia.

With obama i said he would be selected because he would be key to improved relations in the middleeast after the years of fallout with bush.

But just because there is no republican party doesnt mean trump cant win.

He has the simpsons on his side.

[baigan]

Everyone on this thread loves Trump..

I don't like Trump and I don't like Hilary...
I'm just a spectator here for the laughs lol

[EFFECTIC DESIGNS]

So I have a question here why is it that Hillary/Bernie and UNC supporters behave so violently online? Like when there is an article about Trump even the mention of his name they go insane, start cursing others and using obscenities. Where as the Trump and PNM people respond politely with manners and respect.

I have noticed this trend for a very long time sameway if you go on facebook PNM people behave with respect and conduct themselves with manners compared with the typical UNC response. Same with Trump and Hillary supporters. Hillary is worse than Kamla though, atleast Kamla was just paying UNC bloggers to troll everyone.

Hillary on the other hand was paying people $1500 US to go to trump rally and punch people in the face, if not for the hidden video recording nobody would have known this.

[MaxPower]

Like when there is an article about Trump even the mention of his name they go insane, start cursing others and using obscenities.

This is Trinituner...every post is like that and we love it...

Get used to it sugarpop

[EFFECTIC DESIGNS]

Like when there is an article about Trump even the mention of his name they go insane, start cursing others and using obscenities.

This is Trinituner...every post is like that and we love it...

Get used to it sugarpop

nah I eh really mean Tuner alone Was talking about in General, youtube comments, Guardian UK website comments, facebook etc the general behavior of Hillary and UNC supporters are appalling to say the least, when they read an article about Trump or PNM they go into a violent cursing rage, behave like they were dragged up, absolutely no respect whatsoever.

[RASC]

That's the reason they're saying the polls are so heavily skewed. People are aware of this and afraid to announce their choice.

Also they're running pre-screening questions before they start the questionnaire in an attempt to skew the polls.

Look at Brexit... This is basically a carbon copy-paste vote for Brexit is racist, xenophobic regressive, and you're a dumb under educated person.

If that's what you were bombarded with daily plus the polls showing 70% 80% stay.. You'd just keep your mouth shut and vote. Everyone was shocked. Everyone.

[EFFECTIC DESIGNS]

^ very good point by RASC here, best to say nothing to these people and just cast your vote silent.

[The_Honourable]

Do you have ANY idea how hard it would be to "rig the elections?"

Wait a minute... did you know that this happened?

Two Democratic operatives lose jobs after James O’Keefe sting

Scott Foval and Robert Creamer, two little-known but influential Democratic political operatives, have left their jobs after video investigations by James O'Keefe's Project Veritas Action found Foval entertaining dark notions about how to win elections. Foval was laid off Monday by Americans United for Change, where he had been national field director; Creamer announced Tuesday night that he was “stepping back” from the work he was doing for the unified Democratic campaign for Hillary Clinton.

The moves came after 36 hours of coverage, led by conservative and social media, for O'Keefe's video series “Rigging the Election.” In them, Foval is filmed telling hidden-camera-toting journalists about how they have disrupted Republican events. Foval also goes on at length about how an organization might cover up in-person voter fraud. In another Tuesday night statement, the Creamer-founded Democracy Partners, which used Foval as a contractor, denounced both Project Veritas and the statements caught on camera.

More: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/pos ... efe-sting/

The videos:

[EFFECTIC DESIGNS]

I like Trump's plan to impose term limits in congress, get rid of them old hacks who want to remain there until they die.

Also have a look at this video not a fan of Alex Jones at all but some of his videos are pretty good and has a lot of evidence to back it up. Also mainstream media is dying, in time to come people won't bother watching cable news.

[EFFECTIC DESIGNS]

This guy, one of Shogun real good libertarian panders his people in all sense, supports Trump he has a very good explanation as to why aswell. This is the unheard of majority that will vote for Trump, the ones that will give them the biggest surprise at the polls same as Brexit.