Does Jill Stein think she's running against George W. Bush?Quote:
Originally Posted by FPS_Russia
Printable View
Does Jill Stein think she's running against George W. Bush?Quote:
Originally Posted by FPS_Russia
by refusing to say whether or not he will accept the results of the election, he is causing a solid 50% of his mindless supporters to think that clinton's presidency is illegitimate, regardless of what he says on election night (when he actually concedes, which we all know will happen). sad that we're living in a world where this needs to be explainedQuote:
Originally Posted by BiffCo99
any chance you could explain how trump's refusal to say that he'll accept the results helps make sure voter fraud doesn't occur? like how, cause trump knows what they're up to so don't even try? ugh
Blake can u quit bitching about that plz, ur kind of being a crazy person about it, and btw did u watch the project veritas vids?
On the bright side at least any American refugees wont be raping and murdering women based on gender or murdering LGBTQ for being themselves. Still don't get how the fuck the LGBTQ community can support HRC when she's in bed with a bunch of people who think gays should be publically executed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord of the Fraud
Quote:
Originally Posted by blakeby refusing to say whether or not he will accept the results of the election, he is causing a solid 50% of his mindless supporters to think that clinton's presidency is illegitimate, regardless of what he says on election night (when he actually concedes, which we all know will happen). sad that we're living in a world where this needs to be explainedQuote:
Originally Posted by BiffCo99
any chance you could explain how trump's refusal to say that he'll accept the results helps make sure voter fraud doesn't occur? like how, cause trump knows what they're up to so don't even try? ugh
quick heads up; every time you talk to him like someone who isnt learning disabled, it only emboldens him and encourages him to make posts like that.
Listen man, all I know is that 4 Million dead voters are still on the rolls. In Colorado they recently found dead people voting so don't tell me this shit doesn't happen. The DNC machine is ruthless. Just watch the Project Veritas videos. These are evil maniacal people.Quote:
Originally Posted by blakeby refusing to say whether or not he will accept the results of the election, he is causing a solid 50% of his mindless supporters to think that clinton's presidency is illegitimate, regardless of what he says on election night (when he actually concedes, which we all know will happen). sad that we're living in a world where this needs to be explainedQuote:
Originally Posted by BiffCo99
any chance you could explain how trump's refusal to say that he'll accept the results helps make sure voter fraud doesn't occur? like how, cause trump knows what they're up to so don't even try? ugh
And another thing, you know Al Gore didn't exactly accept the results of the 2000 election right away either. Everything worked out out OK in the end. I think its pretty safe to assume this won't bring down the USA either.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ftpjesus
EXCUSE ME *YOU DONT KNOOOOOW ME*
fucking autocorrect, my rep should have said "lunesta" not fucking "luniest". but not accepting the election really is a big deal. it's the difference between the US and fucking [insert random african nation]. i know he'll do it eventually, but stillQuote:
Originally Posted by thesidedish
did not watch project veritas vids yet, only read about them. i'll check then out and expect to be thoroughly disgusted, but nothing surprises me at this point with hill or politics in general
Quote:
Originally Posted by BiffCo99Listen man, all I know is that 4 Million dead voters are still on the rolls. In Colorado they recently found dead people voting so don't tell me this shit doesn't happen. The DNC machine is ruthless. Just watch the Project Veritas videos. These are evil maniacal people.Quote:
Originally Posted by blake
And another thing, you know Al Gore didn't exactly accept the results of the 2000 election right away either. Everything worked out out OK in the end. I think its pretty safe to assume this won't bring down the USA either.
Do dead people vote for the Democratic or Republican party?
http://www.conservativeinfidel.com/w...20040990-9.jpg
Dead people always vote Democrat. Either way the system has to be cleaned up.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheXFactorQuote:
Originally Posted by BiffCo99
Do dead people vote for the Democratic or Republican party?
http://www.conservativeinfidel.com/w...20040990-9.jpg
Quote:
Originally Posted by blakefucking autocorrect, my rep should have said "lunesta" not fucking "luniest". but not accepting the election really is a big deal. it's the difference between the US and fucking [insert random african nation]. i know he'll do it eventually, but stillQuote:
Originally Posted by thesidedish
did not watch project veritas vids yet, only read about them. i'll check then out and expect to be thoroughly disgusted, but nothing surprises me at this point with hill or politics in general
Well in the 2nd one a guy who claims to be connected all the way up to the top of the dnc won't stop talking about how much he loves voter fraud
Quote:
Originally Posted by ftpjesusOn the bright side at least any American refugees wont be raping and murdering women based on gender or murdering LGBTQ for being themselves. Still don't get how the fuck the LGBTQ community can support HRC when she's in bed with a bunch of people who think gays should be publically executed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord of the Fraud
Agreed. Your community shouldn't be supporting Hillary.
Wish you all the best in your fight for equality.
This "voter fraud" shit is hilarious.
http://www.factcheck.org/2016/10/tru...-fraud-claims/
"But the other reality is that Clinton has been, at every turn, prepared, disciplined, and coldly strategic. She triggered Trump’s epic meltdown purposely, and kept Trump off balance over multiple weeks that probably represented his last chance to turn the election around. She was ready for every question, prepared for every attack, and managed to goad Trump into making mistakes that became the main story the day after every single debate."
trump just went from +475 to +500 in less than an hour of the debate ending.
pretty sure he's rope-a-doping and will CRUSH her in the polls once he starts tweeting at 4am.
I think Trump has been with more nasty girls than Hillary.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2KOQfZ0Zd0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfLZfyphg0M
lol....this is so fucking sad if this is what you seeQuote:
Originally Posted by sonatine
Quote:
Originally Posted by sonatine
Looks like from +400 to +375 to me
:TRAIN
i think i spotted a tell in Hillary during the debate...anyone else notice this?: when speaking, she occasionally blinks long (that is, closes her eyes for more than an instant)
my read: she is conflicted what she is saying/about to say, and the words said at that point are not coming naturally then/lacks sincerity---or as she said in her leaked speech to Goldman Sachs--her public thoughts are different than her private one...
i noticed the tell seemed most frequent when talking about what she would do when president
(i didn't watch any of the first 2 debates and only about 10 minutes of the last one)
OBAMA'S BROTHER IS GOD
BEEN GOING ON A TWITTER BARAGE ALL DAY, TWEETING NON STOP RIGHT NOW
Edit latest one LMFAO
Thoughts about the debate:
- It's not going to be a game-changer either way, which is bad news for Trump.
- Hillary really, really dodged the question related to the Clinton Foundation being a pay-for-play operation. When questioned about it by the moderator, she ignored the question itself and rambled on about all the charity work the foundation did. When the moderator interrupted and asked her once again to answer what he asked, she ignored him and rambled again about the charity work. So just in case the Wikileaks documents related to that weren't enough, it should now be 100% clear that Hillary was selling access to the Secretary of State office, which is pretty horrifying. Donald Trump didn't properly seize upon this, though, and allowed Hillary to turn it around on him, related to his Trump Foundation.
- Trump made an incredibly idiotic statement regarding late-term abortions, claiming that some abortions happen the day before a baby is about to be born. Huh?? The baby would be full term at that point, and simply birthed via a C-section if necessary. Late-term abortions occur when the baby is well formed inside the uterus, but not developed enough to survive outside the womb. Amazingly, Hillary did not seize upon this idiotic blunder, and instead rambled out some hard-to-understand statement regarding her position on late term abortion.
- When Hillary accused Trump of being Putin's puppet, Trump shot back, "You're the puppet!" It came off as incredibly juvenile, in a "I know you are, but what am I?" sort of way.
- Everyone is panicking over Trump's statement that he will "leave you in suspense" regarding whether or not he will accept the election results. Believe it or not, his stance isn't unreasonable. Given the fact that Hillary clearly rigged the election against Bernie (she was going to win anyway, but it was still rigged against him), you can't blame Trump for taking a wait-and-see attitude regarding accepting any defeat, especially if it ends up super-close. Why aren't any Democrats attacking Al Gore for refusing to "accept" Bush's victory in 2000? Any candidate has the right to challenge results he feels are incorrect or manipulated. However, as usual, Trump answered poorly. He should have said that he will graciously accept defeat, unless he sees clear evidence that the votes were either miscounted or fraudulently cast.
- I find it ridiculous that Hillary is defending the Wikileaks stuff by stating that Russia hacked these e-mails in order to influence the election. Even if that's true, and even if Russia is firmly in Trump's corner, that doesn't change the information that was found via this hack. Given that the hack exposed a lot of Hillary's shadiness, the identity/motivation of the hackers is only secondary, and we shouldn't discount what was found simply because we don't like the source. Even Hillary isn't denying that the e-mails are authentic.
- Trump's outbrurst of "You're a nasty woman" at the end was typical of his inability to control himself, and indicative of why he won't win this election.
- Hillary's statement at the end that she will take on Wall Street is LOL, given what we know about her.
- Hillary's statement regarding fixing Obamacare via "wellness programs" was nonsense. Preventative care and wellness programs sound great on the surface, but in reality they don't cut our healthcare costs very much. For one, many people living unhealthy lifestyles are unlikely to do these checkups regularly, even if free. Second, an over-reliance on "wellness medicine" often ends up with treating nonexistent "problems", both intentionally (via shady doctors) and unintentionally (incompetent doctors). Neither Trump nor Hillary has any clue on how to fix health care in this country, though Trump is a bit more on the right track (with his plan to eliminate state borders when shopping for health care.)
- Trump seemed to irritable during this debate. Hillary put on the usual phony-looking smile, and did her off-putting snickers during Trump's answers, but overall she had the better demeanor.
- As much as I applaud Trump's plan to lower taxes, he really has no clue of what he's talking about, and really has no idea how he would translate lower taxes to a better economy. He also hasn't given a clear answer as to HOW he will stop jobs from moving out of the country.
- I await yet another highly-biased SNL parody of this debate, where they spend 8 of the 9 minutes brutally bashing Trump, and 1 of the 9 minutes firing incredibly weak shots at Hillary's awkward roboticness.
- I am about to go lay a bunch of bets on PredictIt on Hillary in various swing states, depending upon the odds. I think she has this one locked up.
You think the Russians are bluffing on ww3?
Bernie doesn't think so.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
That statement from Bernie doesn't deny that the DNC rigged the process against him, even if it wasn't directly via voter fraud.Quote:
Originally Posted by DirtyB
Besides, he sold out. In fact, Bernie sold out before he even sold out. He knew he had no shot, but just wanted to maintain a presence for as long as possible, without actually directly harming Hillary's chances to win. That's why he wouldn't mention the e-mails, and all of his attacks against her came from the left -- ones that could not be repeated by the Republican candidate in the general election.
My point remains.
You can't tell a candidate to commit to accept the results of a defeat until he sees the way the election goes down. The Florida situation of 2000 should have taught us that.
No doubt Trump answered the question stupidly, but I don't blame him for reserving the right to object if it's a close election and it looks like he got screwed in some way.
It was his best debate of the 3.
http://cdn.thedailybeast.com/content...285.cached.jpg
1980-1988: George H.W. Bush is V.P.
1988-1992: George H.W. Bush is President
1992-2000: Bill Clinton is President
2000-2008: George W. Bush is President
2008-2016: Barack Obama is President
2016-2024: Hillary Clinton is President
Groundbreaking stuff
Trump is talking about actual voter fraud. That would be the only valid reason to not accept the official results. So anything that happened in the Dem primary would have no bearing on that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
I'm just glad that Trump said it, and looked like a buffoon who has no business running for elected office. And it came right after his campaign manager and his daughter said that he would definitely abide by any results of the election. They tried to help him out, and he just shits on them.
Do you trump supporters think fox news is part of msm and working to get hc elected?
This is from fox's site. http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2016/...election.html#
Indeed, when Trump said that he won’t necessarily accept the results of the election he made history as the first major party candidate to say something like this before an election. And history will always look back on this with horror.
Not only are Trump’s claims about election rigging unfounded – studies have shown that 31 instances of voter fraud out of a billion votes cast between 2000 and 2014 – but they’re incredibly dangerous and preview serious unrest after the election.
Comments like this also show why Donald Trump didn’t do anything to turn around the race this evening. He has been bleeding support from white college educated women who are certainly not going to be heading back into his camp after he called Clinton a “nasty woman” and told a series of lies about his treatment and statements about women.
I also don't see much in his performance that will appeal to independent swing voters who have been moved over to Clinton’s camp because of questions on his judgment and temperament. Saying that he won’t necessarily accept the results of the election does him no good in that arena.
Exactly what in this tweet caused you to laugh your fat ass off?Quote:
Originally Posted by thesidedish
I'm sure Bernie can live with the fact that some of his republican non supporters think he didn't keep it real enough. Like how dare he do something that benefits him and ideals he believes in. He got about 2/3 of the issues he was driving to the DNC/Hillary platform and enough support to maybe get about half of them through in some form assuming Hillary wins. That's pretty good for a losing campaign and only thing he should have done for his supporters. You know stuff based on reality from a career politician that understands that you can't get anything done without compromises. Apparently that's selling out these days.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan DruffThat statement from Bernie doesn't deny that the DNC rigged the process against him, even if it wasn't directly via voter fraud.Quote:
Originally Posted by DirtyB
Besides, he sold out. In fact, Bernie sold out before he even sold out. He knew he had no shot, but just wanted to maintain a presence for as long as possible, without actually directly harming Hillary's chances to win. That's why he wouldn't mention the e-mails, and all of his attacks against her came from the left -- ones that could not be repeated by the Republican candidate in the general election.
Yes, yes and yes. You could say she looked like a presidential candidate. Her opponent looked like a schoolyard bully who has been called out. The debates at least gave the public a chance to watch their candidate under fire. All politicians say what people want to hear and are mostly preaching to the choir. As mentioned Clinton was prepared and not ruffled by Trump's shtick. His bravado does not hold up to the light of day. I can understand how conservatives will back their candidate and deflect criticism but I can't understand anyone believing Trump came close to winning the debate. The PBS panel discussion afterwards with seasoned journalists were kind to Trump in that they didn't laughQuote:
Originally Posted by sonatine
Haha Druff obv. knows the pro war establishment's talking points. Don't acknowledge anything that could make people not support their future war plans, like threats of a nuclear war from Russia or the threats from Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden and the Pentagon towards Russia.
Nobody who uses the MSM as their primary source of news is aware how close we may be to a nuclear war with Russia. Because they're part of the pro war estab. as well.
Druff still hasn't even acknowledged my payment arrangements I pm'd to him on the $35 I won well over a month ago. :) I should post this in the bugs and fixes but can you make a day counter I can put in my signature to count the days my PM has been ignored haha jk.
This what they've been doing to Jill Stein for years. They've pretty much had a media black out on her, they've locked her up at debates, all kinds of other stuff.
Access angle came from an AP article that was retracted and none of the pay-for-play accusations stuck. Bono didn't get shit and it was pretty much the same story with everything else. You couldn't either show the pay or the play and you kinda need them both. Slush fund retardation is just that. Nothing has been proven. When none of that worked the latest was the claim that they only use 10-20% of funds to charity because retards are too stupid to understand tax reports or they assume that no one can.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
The good ol we couldn't get anything to stick with the Clinton Foundation so lets double down on that angle. That's clearly the smart thing to do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by limitlesYes, yes and yes. You could say she looked like a presidential candidate. Her opponent looked like a schoolyard bully who has been called out. The debates at least gave the public a chance to watch their candidate under fire. All politicians say what people want to hear and are mostly preaching to the choir. As mentioned Clinton was prepared and not ruffled by Trump's shtick. His bravado does not hold up to the light of day. I can understand how conservatives will back their candidate and deflect criticism but I can't understand anyone believing Trump came close to winning the debate. The PBS panel discussion afterwards with seasoned journalists were kind to Trump in that they didn't laughQuote:
Originally Posted by sonatine
Thing is, all the conversations are about how one sided the ass whipping Hillary put on him was. What no one is talking about, however, is how many fucking idiots in this country vote.
People need to stop clapping each other on the back and really consider what can be done about that in the next couple of weeks. Otherwise..
Dirty B you know damn well you're misleading people with that Bernie quote.Quote:
Originally Posted by DirtyB
Clarified
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1JUZ193nrA
Actual transcript of donald
"Let me tell you. Mosul is so sad. We had Mosul but when she left, when she took everybody out, we lost Mosul and now we are fighting again to get Mosul. The problem with Mosul and what they wanted to do is they wanted to get the leaders of ISIS who they felt were in Mosul. About three months ago, I started reading that they want to get the leaders and they’re going to attack Mosul. What ever happened to the element of surprise? We announce we’re going after Mosul, I’ve been reading we’ve been going after Mosul, how long has it been Hillary, three months?
These people have all left they've all left. They’ve all left. The element of surprise. Douglas MacArthur George Patton, spinning in their graves when they see the stupidity of our country.
So we’re now fighting for Mosul, that we had, all she had to do was stay there and now we're going in to get it, but you know the big winner in Mosul is going to be after we eventually get it and the only reason they got it is because she's running for the office of president.
And they want to look tough. They want to look good. He violated the red line in the sand. And he made so many mistakes. That is why we have the great migration. But she wanted to look good for the election. But who is going to get Mosul really? We will take eventually. If you look at what's happening much more tougher it's going to be more deaths than we thought. But the leaders I wanted to get are all wrong is because they're smart. What do we need this for? So Mosul is going to be a wonderful thing and Iran should write us a letter of thank you, just like the other really stupid. The stupidest deal of all time. A deal that's going to give Iran absolutely nuclear weapons."
World leaders typically are capable of thinking and speaking in complete sentences that don't run on. Imagine Druff speaking like this on radio, chat would be hilarious.
US forces left Iraq after Bush and al-Malaki agreed to a timetable that stretched beyond either of their leadership roles. Responsibility for Mosul is not Obama's or hc's.
Current Iraq leader and Kurds want hc to win so they decided to take Mosul? WTF who seriously thinks this garbage is correct?
I'm not arguing that Bernie lacked influence, nor am I arguing that he failed to achieve what he was intending to do.Quote:
Originally Posted by gimmickI'm sure Bernie can live with the fact that some of his republican non supporters think he didn't keep it real enough. Like how dare he do something that benefits him and ideals he believes in. He got about 2/3 of the issues he was driving to the DNC/Hillary platform and enough support to maybe get about half of them through in some form assuming Hillary wins. That's pretty good for a losing campaign and only thing he should have done for his supporters. You know stuff based on reality from a career politician that understands that you can't get anything done without compromises. Apparently that's selling out these days.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
I'm arguing that he was a sell out in the sense that his campaign was never serious in the first place, yet he led his supporters to believe it was.
Few Bernie diehards were on board because he was just trying to inject his ideas into the Hillary platform, while being careful not to actually harm her chances. That's what he was doing, but that's not what he told his cult-like following.
Bernie pretended to be starting a revolution where all the unrealistic dreams of the far (and naive) left would come true, and his supporters (especially the young ones) ate it up.
Then he quietly shrunk into the background and suddenly backed the supposed establishment devil he was fighting against. He didn't utter a peep when it came out that the DNC had the whole process rigged against him. He bent over and continued taking it like Hillary's bitch.
So yes, I guess he was clever in that he misled his followers, created a huge thorn in Hillary's side as a result, injected his ideas in her platform, and then slinked away. But it's also indicative of someone with no backbone or loyalty to those who got him where he was in the first place.
A principled Bernie would have refused to support Hillary after all that went down. But since he was never seriously running in the first place, I guess it didn't bother him too much that the DNC conspired against his campaign.
I guess it's kind of like how TJ Cloutier, during one of his intentional tournament losses where he sold over 100% of himself, wouldn't have been angry if you cheated him.
Please PM me the $35 payment info again, along with the date you won it. Sorry if that slipped through.Quote:
Originally Posted by FPS_Russia
:fraudalert
So everything the debate moderator stated when asking Hillary to comment was inaccurate?Quote:
Originally Posted by gimmickAccess angle came from an AP article that was retracted and none of the pay-for-play accusations stuck. Bono didn't get shit and it was pretty much the same story with everything else. You couldn't either show the pay or the play and you kinda need them both. Slush fund retardation is just that. Nothing has been proven. When none of that worked the latest was the claim that they only use 10-20% of funds to charity because retards are too stupid to understand tax reports or they assume that no one can.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
The good ol we couldn't get anything to stick with the Clinton Foundation so lets double down on that angle. That's clearly the smart thing to do.
If so, why didn't she just directly explain the situation, rather than ignore the question TWICE?
Hillary is very good at quickly answering and smacking down inaccurate statements and accusations made about her, yet on the Clinton Foundation question, she kept dodging repeatedly and wouldn't address it.
"Nothing has been proven" has pretty much become the Hillary Clinton 2016 campaign slogan, and that's not a good look.