Ah, the New York Times, a liberal news outlet that is notorious for misrepresentation of the truth and outright known for its lies and liberal biased. Post credibility lost.
Last edited:
POLITICAL THREAD
- Thread starter kybobcat
- Start date
What to watch for in the first debate: The ‘fake excuse’
"The polls say the number of undecided voters in this presidential election is unusually high.
In a head-to-head race between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, the RealClearPolitics average of polls shows 11 percent of voters are still undecided. That's a very large number for this late date and more than a 37-percent increase over this time in 2012, when only eight percent of voters said they still couldn't make up their minds.
This is probably the biggest reason why so many pundits believe this close election will be decided by the presidential debates, especially the first one coming up this Monday night. They will be crucial because they will once again provide millions of Americans with rational-sounding excuses to finally go public with their voting choices."
"The polls say the number of undecided voters in this presidential election is unusually high.
In a head-to-head race between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, the RealClearPolitics average of polls shows 11 percent of voters are still undecided. That's a very large number for this late date and more than a 37-percent increase over this time in 2012, when only eight percent of voters said they still couldn't make up their minds.
This is probably the biggest reason why so many pundits believe this close election will be decided by the presidential debates, especially the first one coming up this Monday night. They will be crucial because they will once again provide millions of Americans with rational-sounding excuses to finally go public with their voting choices."
The only problem with that theory is it isn't going to be a head to head race.
Well, except for the "Clinton rewrote".
The bill had an acrimonious trip through Congress with many rewrites and reconciliations.
But in the end, it passed with veto-proof super-majorities.
It's interesting that regulation-hating people now claim to disparage the bill. In the 8 years of the Bush presidency, even when the were Republicans in control of Congress, there was no attempt to regulate the sale of derivatives and the like.
Last edited:
Bro! Stop! Immediately! You are killing me.
![[laughing]](http://l.yimg.com/j/assets/img/emoticons/classic/laugh.r191677.gif "Laughing [laughing]")
Nope! It's a Muslim, alright, just as everyone suspected. To be fair, this one might not have been a terrorist. This one might be an ordinary psycho or somesuch. We'll find out soon, though, if he is a terrorist, the media will not emphasize the fact.
One of those rare turkish mexicans.
But we can't discriminate! "That's not who we are!", according to sanctimonious hypocrites in the MSM. They actually do say things like that. Comical.
Moe. Do you demand Hillary denounce the mall shooter who endorsed her?
That's a good point. The media persists in demanding that Trump (and any other conservative candidate whether running for President or dog-catcher) denounce the completely irrelevant David Duke. Over and over again, the media makes that demand. This guy just murdered several people, and I don't know that Duke has murdered anyone. Where are the cries for a denouncement?
For that matter, where are the demands to denounce the Communist Party (the same party that endorsed Hillary), Sharpton, or BLM?
The face of a young child who just looked into the eyes of the devil.
Only one more day till the debates! Can't wait to see if gennifier flowers shows up and sits front and center for the debates. I really don't know why mark Cuban being there is relevant. Either way it will hopefully be awesome
Was he anything other than a criminal? That's going to get rather meaningless isn't? Compile of lists of criminals and their political preferences and have the candidates pronounce upon them.
It sounds like your BHQ** is a liittle off the charts.
(How does this relate to the 2008 financial crisis?)
**Butt Hurt Quotient
Well, there are awfully low expectations from the Trump camp. "Can he keep from fidgeting?" Yes, not fidgeting is the first step to being presidential. And Trumpian non-fidgeting is the gold standard. etc.,
Nope. Still not making sense. If we're playing the kid's game. I'd have to say "Colder".
Trump has already announced he wont stoop to the low tacticts of hillary and will have no guests.
I guess this came after Monday's "threat" to bring Gennifer Flowers. He's Mr. High Road, he is.
Hang on, Clinton threatens to invite Cuban and put him front and center to get under Trumps skin. Trump one ups her and threatens to invite Flowers and he's the one playing dirty pool?
It is clear to me why they invited Cuban, they want to try and get under Trumps skin. Why you can't seem to figure that out is something for you to think about.
I say kudos to Trump for asking Flowers there to rattle Cankles. Two can play that game.
She has been prepping for 3 or 4 days now suggesting to me that she might already know the questions and her camp wants to see which response makes her look better. Remember, she wore a receiver type hearing device last time and now that everyone knows that, they probably want her to look like she is responding on the fly.
Similar threads
