US Politics
- Thread starter RabzonKhan
- Start date
CorporateAffairs
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2011
- Messages
- 2,742
- Reaction score
- -11
- Country
- Location
TRUMP will trounce Hillary in November.
He's picking up fast!
He's picking up fast!
RabzonKhan
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2008
- Messages
- 4,289
- Reaction score
- 3
- Country
- Location
Sorry for the late reply, you are right, Gary Johnson has more appeal to Republicans than to the Democrats, on the other hand, Jill Stein is attracting more Democrats and especially Bernie supporters who have refused to support Hillary.
I also think Johnson is going to play the spoiler for Trump in many other battleground states.
Yes, the angry nasty man he played in the Republican primaries certainly worked for him, but now in the general election he’s paying a price for that bad behavior, and his poll numbers reflect that. To win the elections he must increase his support among women, Blacks, Hispanics, Asians and millennials.
Totally agree with you on this one, some of the anger is absolutely justified and must be addressed.
Tell you the truth I really don’t have the time.
RabzonKhan
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2008
- Messages
- 4,289
- Reaction score
- 3
- Country
- Location
Darmashkian
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2012
- Messages
- 1,137
- Reaction score
- 2
- Country
- Location
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-...fy-hillary-presidency-its-hard-know-what-will
Even the traditionally 'establishment' Wall Street Journal[http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-u-s-department-of-clinton-1472167746] is waking up to the utter incredulity of an American media (and citizenry) which appears capable of cognitive dissonance on an epic scale when it comes to Hillary Clinton. As Kimberly Strassel explains the latest emails show that State and the foundation were one seamless entity.
This is the week that the steady drip, drip, drip of details about Hillary Clinton’s server turned into a waterfall. This is the week that we finally learned why Mrs. Clinton used a private communications setup, and what it hid. This is the week, in short, that we found out that the infamous server was designed to hide that Mrs. Clinton for three years served as the U.S. Secretary of the Clinton Foundation.
In March this column argued that while Mrs. Clinton’s mishandling of classified information was important, it missed the bigger point. The Democratic nominee obviously didn’t set up her server with the express purpose of exposing national secrets—that was incidental. She set up the server to keep secret the details of the Clintons’ private life—a life built around an elaborate and sweeping money-raising and self-promoting entity known as the Clinton Foundation.
Had Secretary Clinton kept the foundation at arm’s length while in office—as obvious ethical standards would have dictated—there would never have been any need for a private server, or even private email. The vast majority of her electronic communications would have related to her job at the State Department, with maybe that occasional yoga schedule. And those Freedom of Information Act officers would have had little difficulty—when later going through a state.gov email—screening out the clearly “personal” before making her records public. This is how it works for everybody else.
Mrs. Clinton’s problem—as we now know from this week’s release of emails from Huma Abedin’s private Clinton-server account—was that there was no divide between public and private. Mrs. Clinton’s State Department and her family foundation were one seamless entity—employing the same people, comparing schedules, mixing foundation donors with State supplicants. This is why she maintained a secret server, and why she deleted 15,000 emails that should have been turned over to the government.
Most of the focus on this week’s Abedin emails has centered on the disturbing examples of Clinton Foundation executive Doug Band negotiating State favors for foundation donors. But equally instructive in the 725 pages released by Judicial Watch is the frequency and banality of most of the email interaction. Mr. Band asks if Hillary’s doing this conference, or having that meeting, and when she’s going to Brazil. Ms. Abedin responds that she’s working on it, or will get this or that answer. These aren’t the emails of mere casual acquaintances; they don’t even bother with salutations or signoffs. These are the emails of two people engaged in the same purpose—serving the State-Clinton Foundation nexus.
The other undernoted but important revelation is that the media has been looking in the wrong place. The focus is on Mrs. Clinton’s missing emails, and no doubt those 15,000 FBI-recovered texts contain nuggets. Then again, Mrs. Clinton was a busy woman, and most of the details of her daily State/foundation life would have been handled by trusted aides. This is why they, too, had private email. Top marks to Judicial Watch for pursuing Ms. Abedin’s file from the start. A new urgency needs to go into seeing similar emails of former Clinton Chief of Staff Cheryl Mills.
Mostly, we learned this week that Mrs. Clinton’s foundation issue goes far beyond the “appearance” of a conflict of interest. This is straight-up pay to play. When Mr. Band sends an email demanding a Hillary meeting with the crown prince of Bahrain and notes that he’s a “good friend of ours,” what Mr. Band means is that the crown prince had contributed millions to a Clinton Global Initiative scholarship program, and therefore has bought face time. It doesn’t get more clear-cut, folks.
That’s highlighted by the Associated Press’s extraordinary finding this week that of the 154 outside people Mrs. Clinton met with in the first years of her tenure, more than half were Clinton Foundation donors. Clinton apologists, like Vox’s Matthew Yglesias, are claiming that statistic is overblown, because the 154 doesn’t include thousands of meetings held with foreign diplomats and U.S. officials.
Nice try. As the nation’s top diplomat, Mrs. Clinton was obliged to meet with diplomats and officials—not with others. Only a blessed few outsiders scored meetings with the harried secretary of state and, surprise, most of the blessed were Clinton Foundation donors.
Mrs. Clinton’s only whisper of grace is that it remains (as it always does in potential cases of corruption) hard to connect the dots. There are “quids” (foundation donations) and “quos” (Bahrain arms deals) all over the place, but no precise evidence of “pros.” Count on the Clinton menagerie to dwell in that sliver of a refuge.
But does it even matter? What we discovered this week is that one of the nation’s top officials created a private server that housed proof that she continued a secret, ongoing entwinement with her family foundation - despite ethics agreements - and that she destroyed public records. If that alone doesn’t disqualify her for the presidency, it’s hard to know what would.
If Hillary isn't leftist enough,those enthusiastic bernie supporters who should be out there campaigning for her will go for Jill Stein.
Those no.s will go up in time. About 20% of Hispanics support him in some polls.
But I don't see those no.s going up by any big margin. The Mexican Hispanic turnout will be very High this time.
Some Black working class voters will definitely support Trump..
Asian vote is rather meaningless in many battleground states(Except Virginia,Pennsylvania & possibly NC,New Hampshire & Minnesota).But I expect him to win some 20-30% votes from them as every Republican Nominee has.
I don't think Millennial turn out will be high,there is nothing to enthuse them in both candidates,unlike Obama who enthused both blacks & Millennials.
He's not gonna make much headway among these guys anyway. There are too many who are idealistic,liberal & impractical.Their large support for the Socialist who would screw their finances+the left-liberal stuff the ones in the college carry out proves it.
Some of these Einsteins even think Bernie isn't liberal enough -_- & even call Obama a Moderate conservative
I don't see Hillary doing anything to abate this anger other than give speeches & talk about how she as a women understands it... But she will not convert words into action
She can be called the establishment candidate of the Dems+Liberals,the favored one of many in the Republican establishment.
Even the traditionally 'establishment' Wall Street Journal[http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-u-s-department-of-clinton-1472167746] is waking up to the utter incredulity of an American media (and citizenry) which appears capable of cognitive dissonance on an epic scale when it comes to Hillary Clinton. As Kimberly Strassel explains the latest emails show that State and the foundation were one seamless entity.
This is the week that the steady drip, drip, drip of details about Hillary Clinton’s server turned into a waterfall. This is the week that we finally learned why Mrs. Clinton used a private communications setup, and what it hid. This is the week, in short, that we found out that the infamous server was designed to hide that Mrs. Clinton for three years served as the U.S. Secretary of the Clinton Foundation.
In March this column argued that while Mrs. Clinton’s mishandling of classified information was important, it missed the bigger point. The Democratic nominee obviously didn’t set up her server with the express purpose of exposing national secrets—that was incidental. She set up the server to keep secret the details of the Clintons’ private life—a life built around an elaborate and sweeping money-raising and self-promoting entity known as the Clinton Foundation.
Had Secretary Clinton kept the foundation at arm’s length while in office—as obvious ethical standards would have dictated—there would never have been any need for a private server, or even private email. The vast majority of her electronic communications would have related to her job at the State Department, with maybe that occasional yoga schedule. And those Freedom of Information Act officers would have had little difficulty—when later going through a state.gov email—screening out the clearly “personal” before making her records public. This is how it works for everybody else.
Mrs. Clinton’s problem—as we now know from this week’s release of emails from Huma Abedin’s private Clinton-server account—was that there was no divide between public and private. Mrs. Clinton’s State Department and her family foundation were one seamless entity—employing the same people, comparing schedules, mixing foundation donors with State supplicants. This is why she maintained a secret server, and why she deleted 15,000 emails that should have been turned over to the government.
Most of the focus on this week’s Abedin emails has centered on the disturbing examples of Clinton Foundation executive Doug Band negotiating State favors for foundation donors. But equally instructive in the 725 pages released by Judicial Watch is the frequency and banality of most of the email interaction. Mr. Band asks if Hillary’s doing this conference, or having that meeting, and when she’s going to Brazil. Ms. Abedin responds that she’s working on it, or will get this or that answer. These aren’t the emails of mere casual acquaintances; they don’t even bother with salutations or signoffs. These are the emails of two people engaged in the same purpose—serving the State-Clinton Foundation nexus.
The other undernoted but important revelation is that the media has been looking in the wrong place. The focus is on Mrs. Clinton’s missing emails, and no doubt those 15,000 FBI-recovered texts contain nuggets. Then again, Mrs. Clinton was a busy woman, and most of the details of her daily State/foundation life would have been handled by trusted aides. This is why they, too, had private email. Top marks to Judicial Watch for pursuing Ms. Abedin’s file from the start. A new urgency needs to go into seeing similar emails of former Clinton Chief of Staff Cheryl Mills.
Mostly, we learned this week that Mrs. Clinton’s foundation issue goes far beyond the “appearance” of a conflict of interest. This is straight-up pay to play. When Mr. Band sends an email demanding a Hillary meeting with the crown prince of Bahrain and notes that he’s a “good friend of ours,” what Mr. Band means is that the crown prince had contributed millions to a Clinton Global Initiative scholarship program, and therefore has bought face time. It doesn’t get more clear-cut, folks.
That’s highlighted by the Associated Press’s extraordinary finding this week that of the 154 outside people Mrs. Clinton met with in the first years of her tenure, more than half were Clinton Foundation donors. Clinton apologists, like Vox’s Matthew Yglesias, are claiming that statistic is overblown, because the 154 doesn’t include thousands of meetings held with foreign diplomats and U.S. officials.
Nice try. As the nation’s top diplomat, Mrs. Clinton was obliged to meet with diplomats and officials—not with others. Only a blessed few outsiders scored meetings with the harried secretary of state and, surprise, most of the blessed were Clinton Foundation donors.
Mrs. Clinton’s only whisper of grace is that it remains (as it always does in potential cases of corruption) hard to connect the dots. There are “quids” (foundation donations) and “quos” (Bahrain arms deals) all over the place, but no precise evidence of “pros.” Count on the Clinton menagerie to dwell in that sliver of a refuge.
But does it even matter? What we discovered this week is that one of the nation’s top officials created a private server that housed proof that she continued a secret, ongoing entwinement with her family foundation - despite ethics agreements - and that she destroyed public records. If that alone doesn’t disqualify her for the presidency, it’s hard to know what would.
Johnson will take votes from Republicans & Moderate/Conservative Democrats.But I doubt he could actually cause Trump to lose a state as of now.
If Hillary isn't leftist enough,those enthusiastic bernie supporters who should be out there campaigning for her will go for Jill Stein.
Those no.s will go up in time. About 20% of Hispanics support him in some polls.
But I don't see those no.s going up by any big margin. The Mexican Hispanic turnout will be very High this time.
Some Black working class voters will definitely support Trump..
Asian vote is rather meaningless in many battleground states(Except Virginia,Pennsylvania & possibly NC,New Hampshire & Minnesota).But I expect him to win some 20-30% votes from them as every Republican Nominee has.
I don't think Millennial turn out will be high,there is nothing to enthuse them in both candidates,unlike Obama who enthused both blacks & Millennials.
He's not gonna make much headway among these guys anyway. There are too many who are idealistic,liberal & impractical.Their large support for the Socialist who would screw their finances+the left-liberal stuff the ones in the college carry out proves it.
Some of these Einsteins even think Bernie isn't liberal enough -_- & even call Obama a Moderate conservative
I don't see Hillary doing anything to abate this anger other than give speeches & talk about how she as a women understands it... But she will not convert words into action
She can be called the establishment candidate of the Dems+Liberals,the favored one of many in the Republican establishment.
Last edited:
Darmashkian
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2012
- Messages
- 1,137
- Reaction score
- 2
- Country
- Location
Donald trump is going to Mexico!!!!@
He will meet and talk wth their president!! And then they will have a press conference.
This is just one day before he will give a speech on his immigration policy in Arizona!
This is VERY Interesting @Abingdonboy @jha
He will meet and talk wth their president!! And then they will have a press conference.
This is just one day before he will give a speech on his immigration policy in Arizona!
This is VERY Interesting @Abingdonboy @jha
jha
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2009
- Messages
- 10,962
- Reaction score
- -8
- Country
- Location
Very Risky move.
Gandhi G in da house
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2010
- Messages
- 9,475
- Reaction score
- -24
- Country
- Location
Almost all polls are showing Hillary winning comfortably. It's not even close.
CBU-105
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2016
- Messages
- 1,136
- Reaction score
- -11
- Country
- Location
the 'alt-right'
I've been following this phenomenon online for a while, and it has been largely an online thing with the funny pepe frog spicy memes etc until crooked Hillary's speech put them in the international spotlight... and with whites all set to be a minority in a decade and a bit, some are alarmed by it, but it would be a mistake to dismiss all those people as racist nazis or whatever.
These are, after all, huge demographic changes that affect societies in profound ways, and this US election has massive racial undertones and the results will have consequences.
interesting discussion here:
try not to be triggered, people, but given that they will be a statistical minority in the US soon, white identitarian politics is probably here to stay, some more prominent 'alt-right'/white nationalists here:
but they have no one unifying ideology, for now it remains largely an online movement, a lot of people would be fired and lose their jobs etc if they endorsed anything of the sort.
/canofworms
I've been following this phenomenon online for a while, and it has been largely an online thing with the funny pepe frog spicy memes etc until crooked Hillary's speech put them in the international spotlight... and with whites all set to be a minority in a decade and a bit, some are alarmed by it, but it would be a mistake to dismiss all those people as racist nazis or whatever.
These are, after all, huge demographic changes that affect societies in profound ways, and this US election has massive racial undertones and the results will have consequences.
interesting discussion here:
try not to be triggered, people, but given that they will be a statistical minority in the US soon, white identitarian politics is probably here to stay, some more prominent 'alt-right'/white nationalists here:
but they have no one unifying ideology, for now it remains largely an online movement, a lot of people would be fired and lose their jobs etc if they endorsed anything of the sort.
/canofworms
RabzonKhan
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2008
- Messages
- 4,289
- Reaction score
- 3
- Country
- Location
Darmashkian, told you, the strategy is working:
Clinton Forces Trump to Defend Key Red States
August 31, 2016By Taegan Goddard
Politico: “After weeks of Brooklyn telegraphing a competitive race in traditionally red states and making public moves that look like initial investments — boosting staff, holding fundraisers, and promising more investments — Trump is now campaigning in Arizona, which has voted Republican in 15 of the last 16 elections, while his running mate goes to Georgia, a state that’s gone red in seven of the last eight cycles.”
“That’s a deployment of precious resources away from swing states that Trump must win to make the Electoral College math work in his favor.” Link
But all polls that show Trump is losing our fake, didn’t you know that?
He can have as many rallies he wants, but we are winning the state.
Bty, I live here.
"The latest survey by independent pollster Stuart Elway was released Monday. It shows Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton with a double digit lead over Republican Donald Trump in Washington, 43 percent to 24 percent. Libertarian Gary Johnson received 7 percent and Green Party Candidate Jill Stein got 4 percent. Sixteen percent of Washington voters said they were undecided and six percent said they may not vote for president at all." Link
Get ready for another flip-flop, I guess.
Well, I can’t read her mind, but I believe she has addressed many of the issues in her economic plan, she supports $15 minimum pay, she has also said that she will only sign trade agreements that will be good for the US economy, and supports financing of higher education, all three key demands of Bernie Sanders and his supporters, on the other hand, I don’t think she can satisfy all of Trumps supporters and especially the Alt-right angry racists.
Nilgiri
BANNED
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2015
- Messages
- 24,797
- Reaction score
- 81
- Country
- Location
One can imagine how truly bad it is, when even the MSM and its biased/rigged polls is unable to hide anymore:
https://gma.yahoo.com/poll-clinton-unpopularity-high-par-trump-112105093--abc-news-topstories.html
Poll: Clinton Unpopularity at New High,
https://gma.yahoo.com/poll-clinton-unpopularity-high-par-trump-112105093--abc-news-topstories.html
Poll: Clinton Unpopularity at New High,
CBU-105
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2016
- Messages
- 1,136
- Reaction score
- -11
- Country
- Location
I know, but its still fun to see him campaign in these deep blue states and hold huge rallies. He's very unconventional, nobody's ever seen anything like him.
Similar threads
