2016 Politics Thread - Enter At Your Own Risk - All Politics & Dumb Opinions Here

[Addison]

Originally Posted by ssbledsoe

When did we start caring about presidential health so much? No one cared Ronnie Reagan had Alzheimers...

Saint Ronnie was a beacon of health, watch your mouth.

[jdandns]

They started caring about Hillary's when nothing else would stick.

As for Trump's health, just imagine how Trump would be describing any slovenly dressed, obviously overweight, baseball cap wearing, always fumbling for words elderly man who looked and sounded like Trump, but wasn't Trump. Trump would describe that person as someone with one foot in the grave and the other on a banana peel.

Hillary isn't sick. Search engines that do or don't bring up results based on inquiries into that matter do so based on how much they factor in hits from conspiracy theory websites (Info Wars/Prison Planet, Breitbart, FoxNews, etc.) into the results. Those results, or rather the lack thereof, are not an indication as to whether a candidate is in good health or not, but rather a search engine's desire to serve the needs of normal people as opposed to those of paranoids.

[quackhead]

Speaking of health care.......

https://www.washingtonpost.com/busin...9a6_story.html

[quackhead]

Originally Posted by no10pin

If you type 'Donald Trump health' in Yahoo, the first result is 'Donald Trump health problems'. Same thing in Google is 'Donald Trump healthcare'.

Not true. I typed in Donald Trump Health in Google and got this:

Donald Trump health letter
........................... care
........................... record
........................... history

They are referencing every auto search item, not just the first one. And in every auto search item on Google for Hillary Clinton Health, there is nothing regarding her actual health.

[no10pin]

Originally Posted by quackhead

Not true. I typed in Donald Trump Health in Google and got this:

Donald Trump health letter
........................... care
........................... record
........................... history

They are referencing every auto search item, not just the first one. And in every auto search item on Google for Hillary Clinton Health, there is nothing regarding her actual health.

If you put in a space after health, that is true.

If the fact that 'history' is the 4th item on a Trump search and not on Hillary's is a major issue, then I'll get us some tin foil hats.

[Astros19]

Liberals are getting pretty good at becoming apologists.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[quackhead]

Originally Posted by no10pin

If you put in a space after health, that is true.

If the fact that 'history' is the 4th item on a Trump search and not on Hillary's is a major issue, then I'll get us some tin foil hats.

OK, so if there is no space, then you can add "healthy" to the list. Thats comforting to know that Trump is healthy, right?


I've got my hat on and ready to go to Proxima b. Beam me up.

[ssbledsoe]

Originally Posted by Addison

Saint Ronnie was a beacon of health, watch your mouth.

Right... So was FDR. It's amazing that the major parties love guys that literally were in failing health during their last terms. But, of course, now presidential health is extremely important.

Originally Posted by jdandns

They started caring about Hillary's when nothing else would stick.

As for Trump's health, just imagine how Trump would be describing any slovenly dressed, obviously overweight, baseball cap wearing, always fumbling for words elderly man who looked and sounded like Trump, but wasn't Trump. Trump would describe that person as someone with one foot in the grave and the other on a banana peel.

Hillary isn't sick. Search engines that do or don't bring up results based on inquiries into that matter do so based on how much they factor in hits from conspiracy theory websites (Info Wars/Prison Planet, Breitbart, FoxNews, etc.) into the results. Those results, or rather the lack thereof, are not an indication as to whether a candidate is in good health or not, but rather a search engine's desire to serve the needs of normal people as opposed to those of paranoids.

Well, I think the bolded could be contended, but I'm fairly certain we won't agree on that. What I think we can agree on is that Hillary's health is pretty inconsequential. I'd also contend my guy Gary Johnson is the most physically fit candidate...

[TheFrenzy]

Gary Johnson is a beast.

[ssbledsoe]

Originally Posted by TheFrenzy

Gary Johnson is a beast.

Well, I mean, Trump is a p*ssy...

[37Jetson]

Originally Posted by jdandns

I hardly think she could have earned the endorsement of the esteemed President Barack Obama if this were a thing. I checked.
It isn't.

First off, she never singled out "black kids" as specifically being the "superpredators" within that statement, but you just did. (Are you trying to out-corndog ol' corndog, man? It can't be done!)

In terms of what she did say, here is that infamous portion of a 1996 speech at Keene State College in New Hampshire in all of its harsh pandering glory to "law and order" voters crucial to her husband's re-election by way of supporting his administration's controversial 1994 Violent Crime Control Act, a law that has indeed led to increased incarceration in a method now shown to have not been equally administered among the various social strata (racist, some would incorrectly say, but actually "classist" due to not being race specific):

Hillary 1996:
"They are not just gangs of kids anymore. They are often the kinds of kids that are called ‘superpredators.’ No conscience, no empathy. We can talk about why they ended up that way, but first we have to bring them to heel."

(Sounds pretty Nurse Ratched to me but probably more Margaret Thatcher to our Conservative friends, who probably think, "Say, where's THAT Hillary been hiding? I like her casual Sadism.")

Anyhow, she clarified and apologized for those remarks in February 2016 when confronted by a young protestor at a campaign event in South Carolina thusly, "Looking back, I shouldn't have used those words, and I wouldn't use them today."

On the matter, she seemed wholly contrite, but more importantly offered in writing, a day following, a lengthy mission statement of what we might expect in this arena from a President Hillary Clinton, looking in part to undo the unintended consequences of that imperfectly executed "tough on crime" legislative folly she and her husband had wrongly championed in 1994.

Hillary 2016:
"My life’s work has been about lifting up children and young people who’ve been let down by the system or by society, kids who never got the chance they deserved. And unfortunately today, there are way too many of those kids, especially in African-American communities. We haven’t done right by them. We need to. We need to end the school to prison pipeline and replace it with a cradle-to-college pipeline."

Turn the page.
Vote Clinton.

Now I know where pgisback's unused subscription was transferred for the Leftist Regurgitation Letter.

[GoTribe!!!]

Originally Posted by jdandns

They started caring about Hillary's when nothing else would stick.

As for Trump's health, just imagine how Trump would be describing any slovenly dressed, obviously overweight, baseball cap wearing, always fumbling for words elderly man who looked and sounded like Trump, but wasn't Trump. Trump would describe that person as someone with one foot in the grave and the other on a banana peel.

Hillary isn't sick. Search engines that do or don't bring up results based on inquiries into that matter do so based on how much they factor in hits from conspiracy theory websites (Info Wars/Prison Planet, Breitbart, FoxNews, etc.) into the results. Those results, or rather the lack thereof, are not an indication as to whether a candidate is in good health or not, but rather a search engine's desire to serve the needs of normal people as opposed to those of paranoids.

Wasn't the Democratic party back in the 2008 election questioning McCain's health. Probably not, that would make them hypocrites.

[cruiserdaddy7]

Originally Posted by GoTribe!!!

Wasn't the Democratic party back in the 2008 election questioning McCain's health. Probably not, that would make them hypocrites.

He won't want to address this. They were all over his health. Was all over the news. Yet....he sure seems healthy 8 years later doesn't he?

[CrownCollector]

Originally Posted by GoTribe!!!

Wasn't the Democratic party back in the 2008 election questioning McCain's health. Probably not, that would make them hypocrites.

How dare you, bringing facts to this thread, shame on you.

[ssbledsoe]

Originally Posted by cruiserdaddy7

He won't want to address this. They were all over his health. Was all over the news. Yet....he sure seems healthy 8 years later doesn't he?

What are things that will be said about Drumpf and Killary for $1,000, Alex???

[ILOVEBEER]

Obama pardons 111 more. Drugs and drug dealing are not dangerous at all. Sends a great message to all the little drug pushers. So much for HOPE.

[trixstar]

Originally Posted by ILOVEBEER

Obama pardons 111 more. Drugs and drug dealing are not dangerous at all. Sends a great message to all the little drug pushers. So much for HOPE.

They are nonviolent drug offenders who would have received lighter punishments if they committed the same crimes today. The war on drugs is a joke and the punishments people received from it is a bigger joke.

[ILOVEBEER]

Originally Posted by trixstar

They are nonviolent drug offenders who would have received lighter punishments if they committed the same crimes today. The war on drugs is a joke and the punishments people received from it is a bigger joke.

So they shouldn't be locked up?

I saw this program and it had Narcotics officers in Seattle. They'd catch people dealing drugs and then arrest them. If they signed paperwork saying they would get help, they just released them. I don't see how that is much of a deterrent.

Some of the people that have been pardoned had weapons charges. I get some of the Marijuana charges, but dealing/manufacturing meth/heroin?

[NeilCO]

Originally Posted by ILOVEBEER

So they shouldn't be locked up?

So they shouldn't be locked up for years while a college swimmer who raped an unconscious girl gets out after three months. (Of course, this all depends on the crime, status as career criminal, etc.)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[NeedChapmans]

Originally Posted by trixstar

They are nonviolent drug offenders who would have received lighter punishments if they committed the same crimes today. The war on drugs is a joke and the punishments people received from it is a bigger joke.

"Those granted shorter sentences Tuesday were convicted of drug offenses for trafficking cocaine, heroin, marijuana and methamphetamine. But sixteen of the commutations granted Tuesday also included firearms offenses. In his August 4 press conference, he said he's tried to "screen out" inmates with a propensity for violence. "

[NeedChapmans]

Originally Posted by NeilCO

So they shouldn't be locked up for years while a college swimmer who raped an unconscious girl gets out after three months. (Of course, this all depends on the crime, status as career criminal, etc.)

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Mancer L. Barrington, III had his sentence commuted by Obama. He was originally sentenced to life in prison in 2009, he will now face a 15 year sentence. The criminal indictment for him stated, “From 2003 to 2005 Mancer L. Barrington, III distributed approximately four and one half ounces of crack cocaine on at least ten (10) occasions to an unindicted co-conspirator in the City of Norfolk.” It goes on to state that Barrington “delivered 291.06 grams of cocaine and a loaded Taurus .38 caliber revolver” to a fellow drug dealer of his.

Sounds like a nice fellow. Looking forward to having him move into the neighborhood.

[NeilCO]

Originally Posted by NeedChapmans

Mancer L. Barrington, III had his sentence commuted by Obama. He was originally sentenced to life in prison in 2009, he will now face a 15 year sentence. The criminal indictment for him stated, “From 2003 to 2005 Mancer L. Barrington, III distributed approximately four and one half ounces of crack cocaine on at least ten (10) occasions to an unindicted co-conspirator in the City of Norfolk.” It goes on to state that Barrington “delivered 291.06 grams of cocaine and a loaded Taurus .38 caliber revolver” to a fellow drug dealer of his.

Sounds like a nice fellow. Looking forward to having him move into the neighborhood.

I would argue that neither of these offenses I anywhere near as bad as rape. And it's not like their sentences were reduced to a slap on the wrist. They've served their time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[NeedChapmans]

Originally Posted by NeilCO

I would argue that neither of these offenses I anywhere near as bad as rape. And it's not like their sentences were reduced to a slap on the wrist. They've served their time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Excellent. Huffington Post was kind enough to publish the man's thoughts as to why his 3rd drug conviction w/ weapons charge should allow him the freedom to do it again.

A Plea From Behind the Walls: Please Limit Mandatory Minimums

He served his time on the first, on the second, and now the third. Do you think we should commemorate his 4th conviction with some kind of congratulatory pin?

[ILOVEBEER]

Originally Posted by NeilCO

I would argue that neither of these offenses I anywhere near as bad as rape. And it's not like their sentences were reduced to a slap on the wrist. They've served their time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Your thinking is off. Not too many people were happy with that rape sentence. He should be doing decades in prison. And they didn't serve their time because they were pardoned.

[NeilCO]

Originally Posted by ILOVEBEER

Your thinking is off. Not too many people were happy with that rape sentence. He should be doing decades in prison. And they didn't serve their time because they were pardoned.

He didn't serve a full life term because he was pardoned, but the guy in NC's linked article has been in prison since 2007. Plenty of time for a nonviolent drug offense, in my opinion.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk