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

[Timmay]

Originally Posted by jdandns

Since you do not realize that the likes of Breitbart, Alex Jones's InfoWars/PrisonPlanet, and Political Insider are not legitimate news sources, but rather the yellowest of tabloid journalism (the old "Weekly World News" but digitized), there is the same point in talking to you about these matters as there is in your posting material from those "sources" in the first place, which is, of course, none at all.

Originally Posted by duwal

Actually as a Republican I think most intelligent people would laugh at that absurd website and artucle

Originally Posted by TASS

SMH...................................

Originally Posted by Timmay

Can't refute so you discredit the source. How DNC of you.

I thought so.

Your queen.

[jdandns]

oooooooooooooooooookay....

[Addison]

Originally Posted by babyfaceposey

Breitbart and Washington Examiner are real news sources. Just because you don't like the fact they lean right does not mean the information they write is false.

Their click bait articles definitely cater to the key doomsday prepper demographic.

[quackhead]

Originally Posted by zachtruitt

Carson a great debater???????? He could beat a dead tree stump maybe but I would bet he would lose to a stuffed animal.

OK If you say so.

[quackhead]

Originally Posted by jdandns

She's faced Obama in debates numerous times, and he's lauded her debating skills. Where is he now?

You mean where is SHE now? He won the debate. Just because someone debates another person who beats them, doesn't automatically make them a great debater. Nice try though.

[zachtruitt]

He is an amazing surgeon. Absolutely terrible/failed politician. I've attended two speeches of his in person and he was the worst public speaker I've ever heard.

[IronMonkey415]

The American Nazi Party has this to say
Chairman of Political Group Says Donald Trump Win Would Be an "Opportunity"

He did air quote with is fingers when he said "OPPORTUNITY"

What is he hinting?

[jdandns]

Hillary's just over the 15% mark in the Blowout Poll, probably the highest she's been here since the first day or two after the poll was added.

If Gary Johnson can get to that number in the national polls, I think he would be invited to participate in the debates, as per the usual rules. That would be a huge benefit to Trump, since Donald wouldn't have to talk as much.

Not a lot of time has passed since the original poll, but as so much of import has happened in that span, would it be OK to make a new poll that asks the members who they support as of today, so as to reflect any changes of mind that may have occurred over the past eventful few weeks? I don't think there would be much difference among those who supported Trump or Clinton originally, but I do wonder if any part of the numerous "neithers" have had a change of heart in either direction.

I think it could be asked this way, and provide a good look at the collective opinion of the forum as it sits currently:

Which candidate do you support for President as of August 7th, 2016?
Trump
Clinton
Johnson
None of the Above

[jdandns]

Originally Posted by quackhead

You mean where is SHE now? He won the debate. Just because someone debates another person who beats them, doesn't automatically make them a great debater. Nice try though.

It wasn't me saying that.
It was our popularly re-elected President who said that.

[jarrodsalas]

Originally Posted by jdandns

It wasn't me saying that.
It was our popularly re-elected President who said that.

Of course he did. Would you expect him to say anything else? "Hillary's debating skills were mediocre".

[HillbillyCletus]

Julian Assange could present irrefutable proof that Hillary Clinton is Satan personified and Hillary's sycophants would refuse to believe it. Don't get me wrong, the same could be said for Trump's sycophants.

I believe Assange will release damning info regarding the Clinton Foundation as part of the October Surprise. In my opinion, it would be very good timing. I believe WikiLeaks has a schedule and they will adhere to it no matter what.

[chezball]

Originally Posted by HillbillyCletus

Julian Assange could present irrefutable proof that Hillary Clinton is Satan personified and Hillary's sycophants would refuse to believe it. Don't get me wrong, the same could be said for Trump's sycophants.

I believe Assange will release damning info regarding the Clinton Foundation as part of the October Surprise. In my opinion, it would be very good timing. I believe WikiLeaks has a schedule and they will adhere to it no matter what.

Like you said above won't matter and the libel media won't cover it.

[Clarka3]

Originally Posted by HillbillyCletus

Julian Assange could present irrefutable proof that Hillary Clinton is Satan personified and Hillary's sycophants would refuse to believe it. Don't get me wrong, the same could be said for Trump's sycophants.

I believe Assange will release damning info regarding the Clinton Foundation as part of the October Surprise. In my opinion, it would be very good timing. I believe WikiLeaks has a schedule and they will adhere to it no matter what.

i don't like the timing. if they have something, i'd like to have it come out when they get it. pushing it back that far is dangerously close to "tampering" with our electoral process.

if there's damning evidence, do it now so maybe somebody that everybody doesn't hate can step up (Sanders cough cough).

[IronMonkey415]

Speaking of surprise, our favorite actor CLINT EASTWOOD is voting for Trump.

[jarrodsalas]

Report: Clinton's jobs push as senator fell flat, helped donors | Fox News

Also, a Quinniapic poll shows 52% believe Trump would do a better job in helping to create jobs. 40% for Clinton.

[HillbillyCletus]

You time the release for maximum exposure/impact. Americans' memories appear to be very short, so the closer to the actual election, the better. If they're released tomorrow, they're forgotten about by next Monday. I believe they'll be the October Surprise(s) and I, for one, am very much looking forward to reading more into the possible/alleged misappropriation of funds involving the Clinton Foundation.

What is interesting, however, is the thought that possible irrefutable evidence that Hillary Clinton supplied ISIS with money (allegedly) would still be ignored by Hillary supporters, primarily because in their view, ISIS isn't as big of a threat as it's being made out to be.

[ssbledsoe]

Originally Posted by Clarka3

i don't like the timing. if they have something, i'd like to have it come out when they get it. pushing it back that far is dangerously close to "tampering" with our electoral process.

if there's damning evidence, do it now so maybe somebody that everybody doesn't hate can step up (Sanders cough cough).

Respectfully disagree. Keep in mind, I have serious doubts anything legitimately damning exists, but: Wikileaks has telegraphed this months away. If they do have something and Hillary "calls their bluff", she and the DNC deserve to reap what they've sown.

[JohnRyno]

Trump telling Detroit he will put American cars on American roads.

Owns a McLaren, Lambo, and 2 Rolls Royces.

[TheHeel]

'Mericuh

[Siberian13]

Originally Posted by TheHeel

'Mericuh

'Merica hell yeah!

[Nicnac]

If people were to condense this thread into basic thoughts, Clinton is guilty of every crime ever (or should be) and Trump is merely a bumbling idiot.

Looks like the wall to wall media agenda is working on this country for Trump to have any credibility to lead our nation in a GLOBAL capacity.

[Clarka3]

Originally Posted by HillbillyCletus

You time the release for maximum exposure/impact. Americans' memories appear to be very short, so the closer to the actual election, the better. If they're released tomorrow, they're forgotten about by next Monday. I believe they'll be the October Surprise(s) and I, for one, am very much looking forward to reading more into the possible/alleged misappropriation of funds involving the Clinton Foundation.

What is interesting, however, is the thought that possible irrefutable evidence that Hillary Clinton supplied ISIS with money (allegedly) would still be ignored by Hillary supporters, primarily because in their view, ISIS isn't as big of a threat as it's being made out to be.

i just don't like how close it is to swiftboat territory. I'm all for them releasing whatever they have, i just don't like the delay if it's obviously a political move. If they are using this time to verify, that's fine by me.

Originally Posted by ssbledsoe

Respectfully disagree. Keep in mind, I have serious doubts anything legitimately damning exists, but: Wikileaks has telegraphed this months away. If they do have something and Hillary "calls their bluff", she and the DNC deserve to reap what they've sown.

solid point.


i want to clarify that i don't much care if something comes up that kills Clinton's shot. if she loses, she loses. The DNC will be getting exactly what they deserved in that case. I just, again, don't like the idea of a late release for JUST political reasons. I would feel the same way if somebody hacked Trump's tax returns and then held them until just before the election.

[xavieronly1]

Originally Posted by Clarka3

i just don't like how close it is to swiftboat territory. I'm all for them releasing whatever they have, i just don't like the delay if it's obviously a political move. If they are using this time to verify, that's fine by me.




solid point.


i want to clarify that i don't much care if something comes up that kills Clinton's shot. if she loses, she loses. The DNC will be getting exactly what they deserved in that case. I just, again, don't like the idea of a late release for JUST political reasons. I would feel the same way if somebody hacked Trump's tax returns and then held them until just before the election.

Let's talk about the timing of Bin Laden's video in 2004..... Who was playing the game before? And who does not play this kind of game when the end result matters the most?

In fact, one does not need to leak real information. They just need to leak something that sounds real, and most Americans couldn't verify the information right before the election.

[ssbledsoe]

Originally Posted by Clarka3

i just don't like how close it is to swiftboat territory. I'm all for them releasing whatever they have, i just don't like the delay if it's obviously a political move. If they are using this time to verify, that's fine by me.




solid point.


i want to clarify that i don't much care if something comes up that kills Clinton's shot. if she loses, she loses. The DNC will be getting exactly what they deserved in that case. I just, again, don't like the idea of a late release for JUST political reasons. I would feel the same way if somebody hacked Trump's tax returns and then held them until just before the election.

I can get behind this sentiment. I don't want to sound like I'm solely picking on the DNC. I'd love to see them drop Trump's tax filings showing him paying 0-5% tax on about $200,000 income or something silly like that. It'd be great to see both major parties with an entire farms worth of eggs on their faces; exposing them for the charlatans & creeps that they are.

[rman112]

Originally Posted by xavieronly1

Let's talk about the timing of Bin Laden's video in 2004..... Who was playing the game before? And who does not play this kind of game when the end result matters the most?

In fact, one does not need to leak real information. They just need to leak something that sounds real, and most Americans couldn't verify the information right before the election.

And Obama with Bin laden's death