What's new

US Politics

Most probably the new guy did not understand your coded-language, I'll explain:

Trump called for a “total and complete” ban on Muslims entering the United States = ipecac
Hillary offers blistering rebuttal to Trump’s Muslim Ban = hemlock
I did not have this in mind. Rather, it's that I find Trump's egocentric buffoonery offensive and Hillary's deliberate bending of laws and crooked conduct damaging to U.S. institutions.
 
.
Then they came for me
come on, man, nobody is going to "come for the muslims" in the US if Trump is elected. :tsk:

There are too many checks and balances in your system to prevent that kind of thing, plus, that was never his idea to begin with, he's going to go after the jihadis in the middle east, not regular American muslims.

It is crooked hillary who is directly responsible for destabilizing the middle east and hundreds of thousands of muslim lives that have been lost there... and she's promising to make it all much worse. :sick:

btw, looks like new polls have tightened again, and, for a change, they're covering the Clinton scandals

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/27/us/politics/bill-hillary-clinton-foundation-wikileaks.html?_r=0

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...f84bba-9b92-11e6-b3c9-f662adaa0048_story.html


hmm :coffee:

a week and a bit of fair media coverage, he wins big league. 8-)
 
.
I did not have this in mind. Rather, it's that I find Trump's egocentric buffoonery offensive and Hillary's deliberate bending of laws and crooked conduct damaging to U.S. institutions.
Oh really, give me some examples?
 
. .
If we are 'doomed', then the optimist in me believes that we are 'doomed' only to the extent that we will finally see our worst.


If we finally see our worst. And only if we are willing to do something about it. That's the problem. But then again, I'm a pessimist when it comes to these issues.

It is very tempting to give in to the belief that such people should have either none or limited say in governance.


Well, I wouldn't go that far. Excluding people from democracy is a dangerous idea. Personally, I think that too few people vote and take the political process seriously.

I think that the biggest problem is the media (aside from bad candidates). During the primaries, the media's bias against Sanders was unbelievable. I had to stop reading some sources that I liked because of how bad it was. And their obsession with Trump took away attention from other candidates. Meanwhile, it seemed like Hillary was handled with kid-gloves, and still is.
 
.
If we finally see our worst. And only if we are willing to do something about it. That's the problem. But then again, I'm a pessimist when it comes to these issues.




Well, I wouldn't go that far. Excluding people from democracy is a dangerous idea. Personally, I think that too few people vote and take the political process seriously.

I think that the biggest problem is the media (aside from bad candidates). During the primaries, the media's bias against Sanders was unbelievable. I had to stop reading some sources that I liked because of how bad it was. And their obsession with Trump took away attention from other candidates. Meanwhile, it seemed like Hillary was handled with kid-gloves, and still is.
It is the media which created Trump :partay::lol: They gave him much more publicity than the gave to the others combined,publicity for which Trump spent almost nothing compared to what he received in terms of money!! Now it's amusing to see how biased they are towards Hillary & trying to help her campaign by attacking him.

One reason why Trump made so many outrageous statements was to get the media eye on him constantly & to put all the attention on him & drive his image in the voter's head which helped him win the primaries

They are all in HC's pocket-NBC,ABC,NYtimes,Washington Post etc etc.
That's why poor Bernie couldn't get any publicity & they are shamelessly advertising & rooting for Hillary now.

https://medium.com/@0rf/the-washington-post-bias-ae07f9b033c9#.8o2996tx5
http://inthesetimes.com/article/189...t-investigated-itself-for-anti-bernie-sanders
http://usuncut.com/politics/washington-post-bias-against-bernie-sanders/


The Clinton FOundation too is a good example...
@jha

I know one thing for sure,she took big money from Amar Singh(an Indian politico) & Sant Singh Chatwal(An Indian American hotellier) to support & lobby for the Indo-US nuclear deal & remove the sanctions her Husband placed on us.
Amar Singh's party was part of the Ruling coalition in power that timt which strongly supported & wanted this deal,he has good contacts wherever money can be made. He also acts as a conduit & works for other people/interests if the amount given is right

They donated big money to her foundation & Chatwal even sat on the Board for some time.

http://www.firstpost.com/world/hill...o-us-nuclear-deal-trump-campaign-2855212.html
http://www.firstpost.com/politics/f...n-donation-to-clinton-foundation-2218136.html

A new book titled Clinton Cash has raised the issue again, questioning whether Singh was actually the source of the cash or was a conduit for other interests in India for pushing the deal forward in US Congress. Hillary Clinton, a Senator in 2008, was among the Democrats who supported the legislation in Congress and was reportedly at the meeting with Singh with her husband.

The author, Peter Schweizer, noted as this Times of India report in 2008 did, that if the former Samajwadi Party general secretary was indeed the man behind the generous donation it would mean he had donated 20 percent of his declared financial assets at the time to the Clinton Foundation, which works on a range of issues from relief during natural calamities to health initiatives.

For his part, Singh told some ministers that his name was listed by the Clinton Foundation because he had "facilitated the payment and, therefore, it 'erroneously' appeared in the records," according to the book.

Singh in 2008 had countered the report by saying that someone else could have made the donation on his behalf, and in response to the latest report continues to maintain that he never made any donation to the foundation.

"That is not my donation, I have not given that money to the The Clinton Foundation," Singh, who has long parted ways with the Samajwadi Party
told the Economic Times.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...to-Clinton-Foundation/articleshow/3864349.cms

"Singh figures among those who made donations worth anywhere between Rs 4.6 crore to Rs 23 crore. Assuming that the SP general secretary just about made the grade, he would have parted with at least 20% of his declared assets to the Clinton Foundation.

In his affidavit to the Election Commission, Singh, a member of Rajya Sabha, put the total value of his assets at Rs 37 crore. "
 
Last edited:
.
t is the media which created Trump :partay::lol: They gave him much more publicity than the gave to the others combined,publicity for which Trump spent almost nothing compared to what he received in terms of money!! Now it's amusing to see how biased they are towards Hillary & trying to help her campaign by attacking him.

One reason why Trump made so many outrageous statements was to get the media eye on him constantly & to put all the attention on him & drive his image in the voter's head which helped him win the primaries


I couldn't have said it better myself. The media helped create Trump. Their non-stop coverage of every stupid statement he made crowded out coverage for other candidates. And of course, that's why he said what he said, and did what he did. It brought him a tremendous amount of attention and helped him win the primary.

I can't tell you how many Clinton supporters were gleefully cheering him on, thinking that his nomination would lead to a landslide victory for their candidate. Now they are deathly serious about his candidacy, and tell everyone to vote for her because of him. Clearly, they grossly underestimated just how bad of candidate Hillary Clinton is (though we told them this many times). Some of them are finally beginning to realize this. Then again, maybe they were right to root for him after all, given that he was one of the few candidates she could actually beat.



The Washington Post was the worst. Your tweet demonstrates this quite well. It was the source I had mind, more than any other, when I commented. I try to avoiding reading that newspaper now.

This election cycle exposed many different media sources. It exposed politicians, and people in general too. Many of them acted like the were progressive, putting down right-wingers, and making it seem like they were unbiased news sources. They took the money of liberals. But when Bernie came onto the scene, their liberalism seemed to disappear. They began relentlessly attacking the man over almost nothing, and largely played down the scandals surrounding Hillary. Many of us took notice.
 
.
You are screwed either way.

Some fools here think that Trump is their next messiah who only speaks the truth. They are wrong. Trump or Hillary won't make an iota of difference. A politician is just that. There are no good politicians.
No one person can bring change on their own,only a movement or group can do that

AI system says Trump will win
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/10/28/dona...pular-than-obama-in-2008-ai-system-finds.html

Astrologers give us ther take
http://www.inquisitr.com/3590535/election-2016-predictions-what-astrologers-are-saying/
 
.
A great man and a true patriot ! :usflag:



Trump 'makes me fear for the ultimate well-being of the country,' says Libertarian Bill Weld
la-na-politics-us-vote-libertarian-johnson-20161025.jpg



Bill Weld, the Libertarian vice presidential nominee, explicitly warned Tuesday against the dangers of a Donald Trump presidency in a message aimed at voters torn between the two major parties’ nominees.

The Republican nominee, he warned, would not be able to stand up to the pressure and criticism that comes with the Oval Office job "without becoming unhinged and unable to perform competently the duties of his office.”

The former Massachusetts governor and former Republican stopped well short of endorsing Democrat Hillary Clinton. Weld is running with Gary Johnson, a former governor of New Mexico, and their third-party bid is drawing low single digits in the polls.

Earlier this month, Weld announced that his goal for the remaining days of the election was to deny Trump the White House and then to help rebuild the Republican Party in the aftermath.

On Tuesday, at a press conference in Boston, Weld effectively acknowledged that he and Johnson would not win on Nov. 8. He said third parties typically face long odds because they fail to meet the criteria to participate in candidates' debates.

“Against that backdrop, I would like to address myself to all those in the electorate who remain torn between two so-called major party candidates whom they cannot enthusiastically support,” Weld said.

“I’m speaking particularly to those Republicans who feel that our president should exhibit commonly accepted standards of decency and discipline.”

Weld said Trump is unstable, has run a grievance campaign, sees those who look or speak differently than he does as enemies, and has proved himself incapable of handling criticism.


All this makes Trump different from other politicians with whom he may have had political differences with in the past, Weld said.

“Not in my lifetime … has there been a candidate for president who actually makes me fear for the ultimate well-being of the country, a candidate who might in fact put at risk the solid foundation of America that allows us to endure even ill-advised policies and the normal ebb and flow of politics,” Weld said.
 
. .
This election is too close for Hillary backers. Relentless attacks on Trump, and Hillary still is not too ahead.

How many people you think are secretly backing Trump, but not admitting ?
 
.
This election is too close for Hillary backers. Relentless attacks on Trump, and Hillary still is not too ahead.

How many people you think are secretly backing Trump, but not admitting ?
The funniest thing about this electiom is the more a candidate talks the more they are criticised when Hillary remains silent her popularity rises when she speaks its falls same with Trump they should just stop talking :D
 
.
The funniest thing about this electiom is the more a candidate talks the more they are criticised when Hillary remains silent her popularity rises when she speaks its falls same with Trump they should just stop talking :D
lmao, imagine if Trump wins, and continues to be a pottymouth.


:sarcastic:


8-)
 
. .
Think of a roided up Duetro
yep, but he'd be a boss, Dueterte, badass as he's been, is still only a serf, Pinoys are small strategic fry, a USN flotilla still dwarfs anything the Chinese might put there, besides, it's just headlines anyway, it'll be a good many years of transition if China were ever to truly replace the US presence on the islands.

I want to see Trump chair G 20 meetings, speak at the UN, make deals with XI and Putin, kill ISIS....it'll be the most epic thing anyone's ever seen. I also want to see Melania help poor orphans etc, really hope she takes up animal conservatism as well, imagine, Melania saves the snow Leopard, the Bengal tiger, the whale shark, a rare frog :bounce:


bill_clinton_now.jpg


:bad:

vs

Melania_Trump_2011_crop_to_face.jpg


:agree:

:partay:
 
.

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom