Election 2016: Trump vs Clinton

[kalm]

JSO: Drama queen with queer thinking.

We have lots of enemies of the United States that are supporting Clinton. We have LOTS of murdering psychopath, minority and majority oppressing Muslin country leaders that are supporting Clinton to the tune of mucho-millions of dollars.

In the end, Russia is less of a threat, and more of an ally, then any backwards Muslin Middle Eastern country. You know that...Islam is more of a threat than Russia.

Ok. Like who? Like who is doing things like hacking the Republican web sites and/or e mail accounts and/or hacking Trump web sites and /or e mail accounts looking for stuff they can throw out to try to influence the election in favor of Clinton?

And BTW it's ridiculous to say that Russia is less of a threat than ANYBODY else. Russia has a well developed nuclear arsenal. WAY more well developed than anybody other than the United States.

Good point! Why hack when you can make campaign contributions as a foreign entity or give tens of millions to the Clinton foundation like Saudi Arabia has!

[Wedgebuster]

Ok. Like who? Like who is doing things like hacking the Republican web sites and/or e mail accounts and/or hacking Trump web sites and /or e mail accounts looking for stuff they can throw out to try to influence the election in favor of Clinton?

And BTW it's ridiculous to say that Russia is less of a threat than ANYBODY else. Russia has a well developed nuclear arsenal. WAY more well developed than anybody other than the United States.

Ever the drama queen...


Trump will teach Putin just who is the superpower and who is the third world country with rockets.

[JohnStOnge]

In other words you guys have nothing. Look, it's reasonable to believe we have a foreign power which happens to want to see NATO weakened and see United States influence dramatically curtailed taking positive action to influence a United States election in favor of a candidate they think will facilitate their objectives in those regards. There is nothing like that on the "other" side.

[houndawg]

In other words you guys have nothing. Look, it's reasonable to believe we have a foreign power which happens to want to see NATO weakened and see United States influence dramatically curtailed taking positive action to influence a United States election in favor of a candidate they think will facilitate their objectives in those regards. There is nothing like that on the "other" side.

Trump makes deals. He'll make short work of Putin in negotiations. he will jawbone that commie simp.

[DSUrocks07]

JSO: Drama queen with queer thinking.

We have lots of enemies of the United States that are supporting Clinton. We have LOTS of murdering psychopath, minority and majority oppressing Muslin country leaders that are supporting Clinton to the tune of mucho-millions of dollars.

In the end, Russia is less of a threat, and more of an ally, then any backwards Muslin Middle Eastern country. You know that...Islam is more of a threat than Russia.

Ok. Like who? Like who is doing things like hacking the Republican web sites and/or e mail accounts and/or hacking Trump web sites and /or e mail accounts looking for stuff they can throw out to try to influence the election in favor of Clinton?

And BTW it's ridiculous to say that Russia is less of a threat than ANYBODY else. Russia has a well developed nuclear arsenal. WAY more well developed than anybody other than the United States.

Thats the thing about nuclear weapons, you dont NEED a well developed nuclear arsenal to be a great threat. Shit even ONE nuclear strike on the US would be catastrophic, of course the US would respond in kind, but when you have regimes who are the equivalent to suicide bombers possessing them, IMO that makes them a greater threat than Russia is. Russia has just as much to lose, perhaps moreso, than anyone else in a nuclear war.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

[Skjellyfetti]

You have to be able to deliver it, though. North Korea likely has nukes.... but, doesn't has science fair quality missiles.

Yeah, there's always the potential for something like a "dirty bomb" being snuck in. But, I don't think that's exactly what we're talking about when we're talking about countries' nuclear arsenals.

[kalm]

In other words you guys have nothing. Look, it's reasonable to believe we have a foreign power which happens to want to see NATO weakened and see United States influence dramatically curtailed taking positive action to influence a United States election in favor of a candidate they think will facilitate their objectives in those regards. There is nothing like that on the "other" side.

Foreign powers are legally influencing elections as we speak. Nice dodge.

[CAA Flagship]

In other words you guys have nothing. Look, it's reasonable to believe we have a foreign power which happens to want to see NATO weakened and see United States influence dramatically curtailed taking positive action to influence a United States election in favor of a candidate they think will facilitate their objectives in those regards. There is nothing like that on the "other" side.

Foreign powers are legally influencing elections as we speak. Nice dodge.

You tell him, kalmrade.

[YoUDeeMan]

JSO: Drama queen with queer thinking.

We have lots of enemies of the United States that are supporting Clinton. We have LOTS of murdering psychopath, minority and majority oppressing Muslin country leaders that are supporting Clinton to the tune of mucho-millions of dollars.

In the end, Russia is less of a threat, and more of an ally, then any backwards Muslin Middle Eastern country. You know that...Islam is more of a threat than Russia.

Ok. Like who? Like who is doing things like hacking the Republican web sites and/or e mail accounts and/or hacking Trump web sites and /or e mail accounts looking for stuff they can throw out to try to influence the election in favor of Clinton?

And BTW it's ridiculous to say that Russia is less of a threat than ANYBODY else. Russia has a well developed nuclear arsenal. WAY more well developed than anybody other than the United States.

JFC...you are really dumb. Duck and cover went out a loooooooooong time ago. You are irrationally holding on to a fear put into you 40 years ago. Grow up.

Islam is a bigger threat than Russia. Russia isn't trying to take over the world and eliminate everyone who doesn't submit...never has.

Think about that, and then look at your silly post.

BTW, has anyone PROVED (you know, that stuff you like to say when you are droning on endlessly about stats versus rumors or false meanings derived from those statistic) that the Russians are behind the hacks? So far, all I have seen is the media desperately trying to scare low IQ people into linking Trump with Russia and the hacks, while ignoring Clinton's links with the evil Islamists in the Middle East.

Oh, the Dems, so far, are, instead of hacking, simply truncating Trumps' quotes to misinform voters. In other words...lying. It seems to work with a certain crowd that doesn't think clearly.

[SDHornet]

In other words you guys have nothing. Look, it's reasonable to believe we have a foreign power which happens to want to see NATO weakened and see United States influence dramatically curtailed taking positive action to influence a United States election in favor of a candidate they think will facilitate their objectives in those regards. There is nothing like that on the "other" side.

Trump makes great deals. He'll make short work of Putin in negotiations. he will jawbone that commie simp because he is great.

FIFY

[SDHornet]

Oh, the Dems, so far, are, instead of hacking, simply truncating Trumps' quotes to misinform voters. In other words...lying. It seems to work with a certain crowd that doesn't think clearly.

The career politicos on both sides have done this quite well for some time now.

[Ibanez]

Hillary Clinton's closest State Department aides were closely involved in coordinating events, talking points, and projects with the Clinton Foundation, according to emails, despite ethics agreements that were intended to create a firewall between Clinton's office and her family's foundation.
Emails released by the watchdog group Citizens United on Tuesday show Clinton aides Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills were in regular contact with foundation officials on topics ranging from the programming at Clinton Global Initiative events to Bill Clinton's public remarks.
While Clinton signed an ethics agreement saying she would not be personally involved with State Department matters related to the Clinton Foundation, her closest staffers were bound by no such restrictions, according to the State Department.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z4IM7fpIMm
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

If you don't think Clinton was involving herself in any of that, you're just avoiding the issue.

[SDHornet]

Hillary Clinton's closest State Department aides were closely involved in coordinating events, talking points, and projects with the Clinton Foundation, according to emails, despite ethics agreements that were intended to create a firewall between Clinton's office and her family's foundation.
Emails released by the watchdog group Citizens United on Tuesday show Clinton aides Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills were in regular contact with foundation officials on topics ranging from the programming at Clinton Global Initiative events to Bill Clinton's public remarks.
While Clinton signed an ethics agreement saying she would not be personally involved with State Department matters related to the Clinton Foundation, her closest staffers were bound by no such restrictions, according to the State Department.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z4IM7fpIMm
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

If you don't think Clinton was involving herself in any of that, you're just avoiding the issue.

Yeah but since she wasn't "directly" involved then she will get a pass from the left. Imagine if a conk did this.

[UNI88]

In other words you guys have nothing. Look, it's reasonable to believe we have a foreign power which happens to want to see NATO weakened and see United States influence dramatically curtailed taking positive action to influence a United States election in favor of a candidate they think will facilitate their objectives in those regards. There is nothing like that on the "other" side.

John, your hypocrisy is amazing. What evidence do you have to prove that Putin and the Russians are doing what they're doing to influence the election because they favor Trump and that Trump is directly involved? You dismiss Hillary's private e-mail server because the FBI didn't charge her but are willing to condemn Trump because of something that Putin and Russia are doing? You're just as bad as the Hillbots who are blindly devoted to her cause and unwilling to consider the mountain of evidence that she is an untrustworthy, deceitful, power-hungry ego-maniac. At least Kalm, Houndie and others are able to admit to her many warts while mocking the hypocrisy of Conks who complain about Hillary's neoconservatism and collection of wealth and connections.

Open your eyes both Trump and Hillary are narcissistic egomaniacs and horrible candidates to lead this country. Hillary is just better at putting a veneer of caring for people and respect for the law in her complete disregard for both. Gary Johnson is the most qualified adult in this election.

[Ivytalk]

Open your eyes both Trump and Hillary are narcissistic egomaniacs and horrible candidates to lead this country. Hillary is just better at putting a veneer of caring for people and respect for the law in her complete disregard for both. Gary Johnson is the most qualified adult in this election.

And that's a wrap!

[SDHornet]

Open your eyes both Trump and Hillary are narcissistic egomaniacs and horrible candidates to lead this country. Hillary is just better at putting a veneer of caring for people and respect for the law in her complete disregard for both. Gary Johnson is the most qualified adult in this election.

Nailed it.

[GannonFan]

Open your eyes both Trump and Hillary are narcissistic egomaniacs and horrible candidates to lead this country. Hillary is just better at putting a veneer of caring for people and respect for the law in her complete disregard for both. Gary Johnson is the most qualified adult in this election.

Nailed it.

The only change I would make is that I'm not sure Trump would be so maligned if he was a Democrat. The Dems are very good at circling the wagons and defending anyone and everyone who has a D after their name. Things they would've gone 15 rounds for when Bush was in office are miraculously okay and ignored when one of their own, whether Obama or Hillary, do the same. It's about the party and about winning. Not that it would've happened, because you can't be an outsider and be allowed to have a chance to win the Dem nomination in today's world (i.e. see Bernie), but if Trump was the nominee for the Dems there would be an amazing number of Dems who vilify him today who would instead turn into Trump supporters. The power of the D at the end of the name is real.

[TheDancinMonarch]

Nailed it.

The only change I would make is that I'm not sure Trump would be so maligned if he was a Democrat. The Dems are very good at circling the wagons and defending anyone and everyone who has a D after their name. Things they would've gone 15 rounds for when Bush was in office are miraculously okay and ignored when one of their own, whether Obama or Hillary, do the same. It's about the party and about winning. Not that it would've happened, because you can't be an outsider and be allowed to have a chance to win the Dem nomination in today's world (i.e. see Bernie), but if Trump was the nominee for the Dems there would be an amazing number of Dems who vilify him today who would instead turn into Trump supporters. The power of the D at the end of the name is real.

Your post lacked the proper emphasis. Very pithy!

[Wedgebuster]

The only change I would make is that I'm not sure Trump would be so maligned if he was a Democrat. The Dems are very good at circling the wagons and defending anyone and everyone who has a D after their name. Things they would've gone 15 rounds for when Bush was in office are miraculously okay and ignored when one of their own, whether Obama or Hillary, do the same. It's about the party and about winning. Not that it would've happened, because you can't be an outsider and be allowed to have a chance to win the Dem nomination in today's world (i.e. see Bernie), but if Trump was the nominee for the Dems there would be an amazing number of Dems who vilify him today who would instead turn into Trump supporters. The power of the D at the end of the name is real.

Your post lacked the proper emphasis. Very pithy!

'Cept no dem candidate would have started out attacking Latinos, Blacks, Muslims, and women, that is just the facts ma'am.

[kalm]

Nailed it.

The only change I would make is that I'm not sure Trump would be so maligned if he was a Democrat. The Dems are very good at circling the wagons and defending anyone and everyone who has a D after their name. Things they would've gone 15 rounds for when Bush was in office are miraculously okay and ignored when one of their own, whether Obama or Hillary, do the same. It's about the party and about winning. Not that it would've happened, because you can't be an outsider and be allowed to have a chance to win the Dem nomination in today's world (i.e. see Bernie), but if Trump was the nominee for the Dems there would be an amazing number of Dems who vilify him today who would instead turn into Trump supporters. The power of the D at the end of the name is real.

Agreed.

The rolls seemed to have changed. The Republicans used to seem far more unified behind their candidates once upon a time.

[CAA Flagship]

The only change I would make is that I'm not sure Trump would be so maligned if he was a Democrat. The Dems are very good at circling the wagons and defending anyone and everyone who has a D after their name. Things they would've gone 15 rounds for when Bush was in office are miraculously okay and ignored when one of their own, whether Obama or Hillary, do the same. It's about the party and about winning. Not that it would've happened, because you can't be an outsider and be allowed to have a chance to win the Dem nomination in today's world (i.e. see Bernie), but if Trump was the nominee for the Dems there would be an amazing number of Dems who vilify him today who would instead turn into Trump supporters. The power of the D at the end of the name is real.

Agreed.

The rolls seemed to have changed. The Republicans used to seem far more unified behind their candidates once upon a time.

The clubhouse of a team on a losing streak is never a pleasant place.

[Ibanez]

The only change I would make is that I'm not sure Trump would be so maligned if he was a Democrat. The Dems are very good at circling the wagons and defending anyone and everyone who has a D after their name. Things they would've gone 15 rounds for when Bush was in office are miraculously okay and ignored when one of their own, whether Obama or Hillary, do the same. It's about the party and about winning. Not that it would've happened, because you can't be an outsider and be allowed to have a chance to win the Dem nomination in today's world (i.e. see Bernie), but if Trump was the nominee for the Dems there would be an amazing number of Dems who vilify him today who would instead turn into Trump supporters. The power of the D at the end of the name is real.

Agreed.

The rolls seemed to have changed. The Republicans used to seem far more unified behind their candidates once upon a time.

Then they started having 18 - 20 candidates for POTUS. dumb scum

[GannonFan]

The only change I would make is that I'm not sure Trump would be so maligned if he was a Democrat. The Dems are very good at circling the wagons and defending anyone and everyone who has a D after their name. Things they would've gone 15 rounds for when Bush was in office are miraculously okay and ignored when one of their own, whether Obama or Hillary, do the same. It's about the party and about winning. Not that it would've happened, because you can't be an outsider and be allowed to have a chance to win the Dem nomination in today's world (i.e. see Bernie), but if Trump was the nominee for the Dems there would be an amazing number of Dems who vilify him today who would instead turn into Trump supporters. The power of the D at the end of the name is real.

Agreed.

The rolls seemed to have changed. The Republicans used to seem far more unified behind their candidates once upon a time.

Awhile ago, really. Once the Tea Party stuff happened, and truthfully, even before that when the Religious Right happened, the GOP, on a national scale, became splintered. It took an amazingly wooden candidate like Gore running one of the worst campaigns in memory to let GWB get into the White House, and even bad Presidents are hard to dislodge after one term in office. But I haven't seen the GOP rally behind one of their candidates since the '80's. The Dems have gone the opposite way, obviously, with basically anointed candidates now, and with their base seemingly fine wit whoever has the D after their name, it's no wonder. Still kinda ugly.

[JohnStOnge]

What evidence do you have to prove that Putin and the Russians are doing what they're doing to influence the election because they favor Trump and that Trump is directly involved?

I didn't say it's been conclusively proven. I said it is reasonable to believe. Also, I didn't say that Trump is involved either directly or indirectly. Here's an article on the issue:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 ... s-election

Allegations that the Kremlin is responsible for the damaging hack of Democratic National Committee emails may never be conclusively proven, but there is plenty of evidence suggesting that Donald Trump’s presidential bid can count on at least some backing from Moscow.

Read on after that statement.

To me it doesn't really matter whether Trump is involved or not. I think that the Russians being involved in trying to influence a United States election in order to see Trump as President should give you pause. If they're doing that they're not doing it because they want to see what's best for the United States. And I think that if you don't recognize the possibility that that's going on you are just being intentionally obtuse.

[JohnStOnge]

BTW, at what point are you people who supported Trump during the Republican primaries going to admit that you screwed up? I can understand having to make a Faustian choice once the choice is between Trump and Clinton. But what the hell were you thinking when that buffoon was running in the Republican primaries?