JohnStOnge wrote:He made a fool of himself today. Like saying the CBS poll said he won when there was no CBS poll.
I can't believe any of you people want this guy to be President of the United States.
Don't poop on Spandos' credibility like that, because at this point he is way more credible than anything JSO poops on here.Gil Dobie wrote:Going spandos on JSO, someone else stole his name. On all the threads, he is acting different.Baldy wrote:
Watching JSO rail over the years against the mainstream media and its bias only to turn around now and use them as the basis of his reasoning for supporting The Hildabeast. The comic relief is
It's got to be the internet polls that each candidate spins as showing they won the debate.Skjellyfetti wrote:Do you mean an internet poll where web visitors click? Or, you know, a scientific poll with a modicum of meaning.
Never knew local affiliates conducted their own polling. Those CBS stations must have a lot of resources!
Yes, the same internet polls The Hildabeast and her team of StOnges would be lauding if she was declared the winner.Skjellyfetti wrote:Do you mean an internet poll where web visitors click? Or, you know, a scientific poll with a modicum of meaning.
Never knew local affiliates conducted their own polling. Those CBS stations must have a lot of resources!
You're 'caught up in the minutiae' if you make the distinction, baldy.Baldy wrote:Yes, the same internet polls The Hildabeast and her team of StOnges would be lauding if she was declared the winner.Skjellyfetti wrote:Do you mean an internet poll where web visitors click? Or, you know, a scientific poll with a modicum of meaning.
Never knew local affiliates conducted their own polling. Those CBS stations must have a lot of resources!
And you're caught up in the JSO cloud of retardation if you think any poll from CNN, PPP, etc is "scientific".Skjellyfetti wrote:You're 'caught up in the minutiae' if you make the distinction, baldy.Baldy wrote:
Yes, the same internet polls The Hildabeast and her team of StOnges would be lauding if she was declared the winner.
26% of the respondents who participated in tonight's survey identified themselves as Republicans, 41% identified themselves as Democrats, and 33% identified themselves as Independents.
Yes. I'd seen that too. Target rich environment. He's a thoroughly dishonest, lying, sack of shit. And he's been all of those things for may years. A bunch of stuff is out there.Skjellyfetti wrote:I bet Ted Boobs REALLY regrets his endorsement now.
And, it certainly explains his bucking the Republican trend and opposing free trade.
TLDR since I know y'all hate reading articles:
There was thought that the embargo would be lifted, Trump wanted to cheat and cut in line and scope out a good deal for his hotel before the pesky laws were changed (they weren't). So he hired a consulting firm to illegally evade the embargo to make deals with the Castro regime to get Trump hotels in before the competition.
And, then... in typical Trump fashion... while running for President he spoke to a group of Cuban-Americans months later (1999) and flaunted his tough on Castro, pro-embargo stance.
http://www.newsweek.com/2016/10/14/dona ... html?rx=us
BTW, I think the issue you chose to highlight may indeed cause Trump some serious issues. He'll try to lie his way out of it, of course. But this one has some pretty straightforward documentation.Skjellyfetti wrote:I bet Ted Boobs REALLY regrets his endorsement now.
And, it certainly explains his bucking the Republican trend and opposing free trade.
TLDR since I know y'all hate reading articles:
There was thought that the embargo would be lifted, Trump wanted to cheat and cut in line and scope out a good deal for his hotel before the pesky laws were changed (they weren't). So he hired a consulting firm to illegally evade the embargo to make deals with the Castro regime to get Trump hotels in before the competition.
And, then... in typical Trump fashion... while running for President he spoke to a group of Cuban-Americans months later (1999) and flaunted his tough on Castro, pro-embargo stance.
http://www.newsweek.com/2016/10/14/dona ... html?rx=us
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/t ... ack-228940The Manhattan billionaire wrapped up his early-morning attack at 5:30 a.m. by asking his followers “did Crooked Hillary help disgusting (check out sex tape and past) Alicia M become a U.S. citizen so she could use her in the debate?”
While Machado has starred in risqué reality TV programs and posed nude for the Mexican version of Playboy magazine, the Daily Beast and other outlets that investigated the claim found no evidence that she has starred in any pornographic films and that the clips posted online actually feature another woman.
You can't "relax" and assume ANYTHING he says is true.Folks, you cannot believe one word that comes out of Donald Trump's mouth.
SemanticsJohnStOnge wrote:Just another little lie thing to mention. Drinking my coffee and in the background I hear the news guy on TV say Trump "falsely" stated that that former Miss Universe was in a sex tape. So I looked it up and:
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/t ... ack-228940The Manhattan billionaire wrapped up his early-morning attack at 5:30 a.m. by asking his followers “did Crooked Hillary help disgusting (check out sex tape and past) Alicia M become a U.S. citizen so she could use her in the debate?”
While Machado has starred in risqué reality TV programs and posed nude for the Mexican version of Playboy magazine, the Daily Beast and other outlets that investigated the claim found no evidence that she has starred in any pornographic films and that the clips posted online actually feature another woman.
Lying is like breathing to the guy. He does it so often you can't keep up with it. What Cain said during the Democratic Convention is absolutely true:
You can't "relax" and assume ANYTHING he says is true.Folks, you cannot believe one word that comes out of Donald Trump's mouth.
"This TPP sets the gold standard in trade agreements to open free, transparent, fair trade, the kind of environment that has the rule of law and a level playing field. And when negotiated, this agreement will cover 40 percent of the world’s total trade and build in strong protections for workers and the environment."
- Hillary Clinton
http://www.democracynow.org/2016/4/13/s ... k_respondsSECRETARY OF STATE HILLARY CLINTON: Our ongoing discussions about Honduras makes clear the urgency of this agenda. As we emphasized, when the United States along with the rest of the hemisphere condemned the coup in Honduras, these interruptions of democracy should be completely relegated to the past. And it is a credit to this organization that they have become all but nonexistent in the Americas. Now it is time for the hemisphere, as a whole, to move forward and welcome Honduras back into the inter-American community.
AMY GOODMAN: In her memoir, Hard Choices, Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton wrote about the days following the 2009 coup in Honduras that ousted the democratically elected president, Mel Zelaya. She wrote, quote, "In the subsequent days I spoke with my counterparts around the hemisphere, including Secretary [Patricia] Espinosa in Mexico. We strategized on a plan to restore order in Honduras and ensure that free and fair elections could be held quickly and legitimately, which would render the question of Zelaya moot," unquote. That was from the hardcover version of Hillary Clinton’s memoir. That section was later removed from the paperback version. The significance of this, Professor Frank?
DANA FRANK: Well, I mean, it’s incredible this woman is a presidential candidate, that she’s doing like things like this, the fact that she would say we wanted to "render the question of Zelaya moot," we wanted to bury the democratically elected president’s existence and act like the coup didn’t happen. I mean, that’s why it’s so terrifying that today—or rather, on Saturday, she would say—she would defend this coup, say it wasn’t a coup, and defend her actions in installing this terrifically horrific, scary post-coup regime. And, of course, that she would cut that out of her memoir, in the paperback version, is also very scary.
AMY GOODMAN: Can you talk about the significance of Hillary Clinton’s stance then? And let’s remember, she was secretary of state serving the president—the president, of course, Barack Obama. What responsibility does the secretary of state have in this? And what did it mean for Honduras right up through today?
DANA FRANK: Well, Obama handed Latin America over to her and allowed her to carry forward this policy. I mean, it was certainly—Obama made some noises the very first day or two, and then, after that, was largely silent and handed over to Secretary of State Clinton. Clearly, he was her boss. If he didn’t approve of this, it wouldn’t have happened. And so, I think it’s really important when we talk about Hillary Clinton, the candidate, what she’s doing, to also talk about Obama’s responsibility for that and Obama’s responsibility for what’s happened since, because I think, as a lot of people know, that coup and the illegitimate election that followed it, that Hillary Clinton is celebrating so clearly in her statements, opened the door to this complete—almost complete destruction of the rule of law in Honduras. People hear about, oh, the gangs and violence and drug traffickers are taking over. Well, that’s because the post-coup governments, both of Micheletti, Lobo and now Juan Orlando Hernández, have completely destroyed the rule of law, because they’re in cahoots with these various forms of organized crime and drug traffickers and violence against the Honduran people. So, this whole post-coup regime has also led to this tremendous corruption of the judiciary and the police and the military, for that matter. So, that’s just—what’s happened to Honduras, it’s not just like there are randomly violent people down there. This is a U.S.-supported regime. The aftermath of the coup, if you look at all these statistics—yes, there was no—it’s not like there was a golden age before the coup, but this tremendous destruction of the basic rule of law in Honduras.
Skjellyfetti wrote:I did say a modicum of meaning.
You still seem to be caught up in minutiae.
USAToday!DSUrocks07 wrote:USA Today editorial board throws their weight behind Clinton (once again not because she's better qualified, but because "Trump is unfit")
Honesly its been over two years of campaigning and I'm still waiting for Hillary to give some form of actual justification to why she deserves any votes at all. Nope, it's all superfluous reasoning, "She's a Dem, She's a woman, Republicans are evil, Trump is evil, etc."
The whole "lesser of two evils" is supposed to be tongue in cheek, but Hilldog has completely built her campaign around that.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk
15 points is too high for Democrats. But, Democrats have always (at least for the last century) had a fairly substantial lead in party identification among registered voters. Any poll of registered voters accounts for this.Baldy wrote:Skjellyfetti wrote:I did say a modicum of meaning.
You still seem to be caught up in minutiae.
Claiming to be a "scientific" poll, and purposely over polling Donks by 15 points isn't minutiae. It's fundamentally deceiving.
