ADVERTISEMENT

POLITICAL THREAD

How will they rule ??!

  • YES - Qualified

    Votes: 41 82.0%
  • NO - Disqualified

    Votes: 9 18.0%

  • Total voters
    50
  • Poll closed .
Interesting....when the left lose a propaganda contest (again, it is rare) this type of supposition gets lobbed out. Not when a community organizer promising to change the tides and world affairs with merely his presence. Via Yahoo...

Democracy, you could argue, is pretty much like sunshine, cold beer and ice cream. They’re all great —until you have too much.

Too much Democracy? That’s not possible, is it?

In fact it may be. Some economists and political scientists are suggesting as much in the wake of the Brexit vote and the subsequent wave of “Leave the EU” sentiment that’s sweeping across Europe. And you can look to a big honking use case right here in the US to make that argument.
 
BS? Dept of Labor statistics are what they are and what they show is that unemployment for blacks has always been higher than that of whites...in fact the record shows that it is consistently 2.x times the rate. What has happened is that the multiplier has slowly decreased from 2.6 x the rate during Reagan, 2.4 x the rate during Clinton, 2.5 x the rate during Bush2 and is now 2 x. The unemployment rate does not stay constant. Bush2 inherited a very low rate and left with a much higher rate. Obama inherited a high rate and that rate has dropped.

w-blackunemployment.jpg


It ain't all been rosy during Obama's time in office but most of the numbers look pretty good.

ObamasNumbers-2015-Q4.png

Fuzz, The bureau of Labor statistics changed the formula for unemployment in 1994. So comparing Obama's numbers to Reagan's numbers are fairly misleading as they weren't calculated the same.
 
Our nation's foundational principles regarding the Rule of Law has been on shaky ground for quite some time. Comey's convoluted explanation of why HRC should not face indictment despite the FBI's findings (which seem to fit the very definition of gross negligence) is just the latest example of how corrupt our government has become. We celebrated 240 years of independence yesterday...it's been a hell of a run! Sad to know that my generation may be the one Reagan was referring to when he said that we may one day tell our grandchildren what it was like to be free. Between the FBI statement today, and the scourge of having either Trump or Clinton in the White House, we may be closer to the precipice than I even imagined. I've reached the point where I've given up on elected officials and the levers of government. My only concern now is making sure my family is equipped to deal with the coming hell that looms on this nation's horizon. May God have mercy upon this once great nation.

Counterpoint: We gonna win, you gonna lose! <tear lick, hillary brushing shoulder, deal with it obama>
 
  • Like
Reactions: bigblueinsanity
What the hell is the first sentence even supposed to mean? The article flat out says Putin hasn't donated any money to anyone. And even if he had, don't you think he would have given it to the Clinton Foundation like the rest of the corrupt world dictators?


Also, what do you expect to learn from Trump's tax return? Can you give us one specific item you expect to see? Or are you so damn dumb, you think there's something illegal or nefarious hiding in a document Trump files with the US government?

It's will show that Trump's companies reported as little taxable gain as possible. The same as any halfway competent business person would.

Yet it'll be spun to say "look Trump's not even that rich!" As if that matters, in the grand scheme of things. But it will take down his brand a notch.

I bet the followers of Hilliary really do not understand or even have a clue about the details of which Bhengazi could even be her fault.......let alone the actual emails and how that could possibly in anyway put our country at risk.

I mean after all none of them email anything more than "hey, hi, how are you" or "work? Puh-leaze!"

They know. They just don't care. Big difference.

I wonder if the FBI would have recommended charges against the man Clinton and Obama had thrown in jail to cover their Benghazi fvck up.

You know, it wouldn't surprise me if that guy was just some stand in actor, and not even real. We haven't heard another peep out of that. And he had his head covered with a hood while marching him to prison.

Would be interesting if anyone has actually laid eyes on him since then.
 
This will hang over her head. Like I said, pretty good outcome for the Rs.....

Washington Post
's Chris Cillizza notes FBI director James Comey "directly disputed" several statements Hillary Clinton has made in the past about the private server she maintained during her tenure at the State Department.

"He directly disputed the fact that
she said she had never sent or received a classified e-mail," Cillizza said Tuesday on MSNBC. "He directly disputed the idea that it is possible that her account has been attacked. He directly disputed the idea that her lawyers and she had deleted only those e-mails that were personal, entirely personal in nature, saying they had found e-mails that contained sort of professional information in there as well."

"What James Comey did today creates a number of issues for the story she's been telling about her e-mail server for the last 15 months," Cillizza added.
 
You people who think this in any way negatively affects Clinton's chance at being POTUS are fools.

The only way the email stuff was going to impact her chances is if she was under felony indictment or convicted of a felony and Obama chose not to pardon her. The letter of the law would have needed to stop her from being POTUS.

Counting on a bunch of retards who would consider voting for her to change their minds based on today's press conference is wishful thinking.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AlbanyWildCat
The more you try to fight The Big Dog the more you will suffer humiliating defeat. There is a pecking order. The Big Dog is atop the food chain. He's calling the shots. Fall in line and your life will be much better.
 
Most of them are cowards. They refuse to offer criticism of her or acknowledge that they're voting for her. But they sure love to criticize Trump though.

They only care that it's a Democrat. They don't care for ethics or about her corruption.
I'm confused by this...how does this fit with Gary Johnson voters? Libertarians don't support Hilary Clinton at all...Republicans are the ones that do government the way libertarians want it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Willy4UK
Counterpoint: We gonna win, you gonna lose! <tear lick, hillary brushing shoulder, deal with it obama>
Progressivism will be the ultimate downfall of this nation unless a collective national re-awakening to embrace Foundational Principles takes place. Unfortunately, I don't see it happening....I'm afraid we're too far gone. I'll manage to navigate the last 30-40 years of my life (if God grants me that long), but it saddens me to think about what the future holds for my children and grandchildren.
 
Last edited:
I'm confused by this...how does this fit with Gary Johnson voters? Libertarians don't support Hilary Clinton at all...Republicans are the ones that do government the way libertarians want it.

Unfortunately for true libertarians voting Johnson is just aiding the clinton campaign. There's really no way around it in the current climate. If Johnson took 8% at least 5 % of that would be from Trump.

It's why I say in this election a voters conscience needs to take a backseat to strategic political engineering. 16 straight years of Obama/Clinton is the furthest thing from a true libertarians point of view. The only thing that should matter (imo) to true conservatives and libertarians is keeping modern day western european ideology out of power. We won't get it by throwing away votes on a choice like Johnson, who has literally a negative infinity's chance at winning.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bigblueinsanity
Unfortunately for true libertarians voting Johnson is just aiding the clinton campaign. There's really no way around it in the current climate. If Johnson took 8% at least 5 % of that would be from Trump.

It's why I say in this election a voters conscience needs to take a backseat to strategic political engineering. 16 straight years of Obama/Clinton is the furthest thing from a true libertarians point of view. The only thing that should matter (imo) to true conservatives and libertarians is keeping modern day western european ideology out of power. We won't get it by throwing away votes on a choice like Johnson, who has literally a negative infinity's chance at winning.
Bottom Line: We're screwed whether the next POTUS is Trump or HRC. As the 'great' Rev. Jeremiah Wright so eloquently stated, "America's chickenzzzz....have come home to roost!" This is what happens when an uneducated electorate goes to the voting booth.
 
I think the assertion was there are a lot of people who will undoubtedly vote for Hillary pretending to support Johnson as a way to get around defending a lying POS like Clinton. Not necessarily that libertarians like Clinton. At least I hope that's right
I agree with this other than the word "assertion", prefer "settled catpaw science".
 
  • Like
Reactions: TransyCat09
I'm confused by this...how does this fit with Gary Johnson voters? Libertarians don't support Hilary Clinton at all...Republicans are the ones that do government the way libertarians want it.
You must not read this thread that often but every democrat in here, in some odd vein of self loathing, says they're going to vote for Gary Johnson. All of them. In fact 137% of all Political Thread posters say they are going to vote for Gary Johnson but won't. Odds are you, in fact, are Gary Johnson.

So bizarre D's on here won't fess up to supporting Hillary Clinton, but they are an odd lot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: qwesley and ymmot31
Unfortunately for true libertarians voting Johnson is just aiding the clinton campaign. There's really no way around it in the current climate. If Johnson took 8% at least 5 % of that would be from Trump.

It's why I say in this election a voters conscience needs to take a backseat to strategic political engineering. 16 straight years of Obama/Clinton is the furthest thing from a true libertarians point of view. The only thing that should matter (imo) to true conservatives and libertarians is keeping modern day western european ideology out of power. We won't get it by throwing away votes on a choice like Johnson, who has literally a negative infinity's chance at winning.
No we are all well aware of that...but our main goal is to get him to poll atleast 15%, hes around 10% now. We don't actually think he can win and when it comes to the actual election we will do what needs to be done, but he's gotten further than any libertarian ever has. The reason we want him to get to 15% is that means he gets to be in the debates. Which is strategic for us in the long run as people can understand what Libertarian actually is. So right now he is gaining votes up to that point from people who hate both but think it's unethical to not vote and of course for those that are actually Libertarian.

When it comes down to just the 2,Libertarians will adjust accordingly, no libertarian is going to support more government or Hilary.
 
Think of the millions in taxpayer dollars that were lit on fire today.

The FBI director lays out all the elements of the crimes Clinton committed on live TV, then decides he thinks prosecutors shouldn't pursue the slam dunk case.

Obama and Clinton are flying around at the expense of the American taxpayer while she speaks from the presidential podium.

And that's just one normal day in America. But hey, let's raise taxes on the rich to keep spending money in great places.
 
Why couldn't we have just elected Shirley Chisholm back in 72? We could have knocked out two social experiments at one time. A two for one sale. Two birds with one stone, so to speak.
She was better by far than either of these two.
 
Bottom line is this: Ask ANYBODY who has been read into a SAP and signed non disclosure agreements if they think they would have gotten off free and clear if they had done the same thing. I'll answer this as well since I was read into a number of SAP's. Right now, I'd be searching for the best criminal defense attorney to keep my sorry ass from going to the pokey and being Bubba's love slave in the slam. No doubt in mind mind what so ever, this is a BS decision and cowardly decision by the Director of the FBI!
 
Bottom line is this: Ask ANYBODY who has been read into a SAP and signed non disclosure agreements if they think they would have gotten off free and clear if they had done the same thing. I'll answer this as well since I was read into a number of SAP's. Right now, I'd be searching for the best criminal defense attorney to keep my sorry ass from going to the pokey and being Bubba's love slave in the slam. No doubt in mind mind what so ever, this is a BS decision and cowardly decision by the Director of the FBI!
Thank you. I have been saying this for months. I am in utter disbelief.
 
Keep in mind folks that the FBI only collects the facts and allows the DOJ to decide whether to bring charges or not. Anyday now I expect the AG to charge Clinton. I mean, why wouldn't she? She was only appointed as a US Attorney in NY by Bill Clinton, is part of the most corrupt administration in modern US history, and only had a casual private meeting with Bill Clnton just days before the FBI made their ruling.
 
Let's all calm down.

I really think this was close to the best outcome for republicans.

We, at least I didn't want someone else taking her spit as the nominee. I think hillary gives us the best chance at winning.

The only better outcome was if this exact week played out a few months later in the process. But some very good soundbites/quotes came out of fbi director mouth.

I really didn't want her to be charged and then someone else gets this long to build support.
 
Did I hear that correct at the end? Did Comey really say that other people under the same circumstances would've charged!?!?
Yes. He did.

May as well have gone on and said it, "the Clinton's play by different rules than the rest of you, do not take this to mean that if you mistakenly break a law, we won't prosecute you."
 
She did such a fine job of telling the truth about this, no way she's lying about Benghazi, right? Why was she given time to delete emails before the FBI looked at them? If police come to your house with a warrant, do they give you time to get rid of evidence and then come back tomorrow and take your word that everything is still there?

They are supposed to be held to a higher standard.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bill Derington
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT