2016 Elections

[Balloon guy 158]

Democrats are much better than Republicans at ignoring their own morals and ethics to support each other.

 

How else did feminist support Bill?

[Balloon guy 158]

Al Smith dinner was okay.

 

Donald started strong, then fell apart.

 

Hillary was off on timing and had almost as many lame jokes.

 

His "Pardon Me" joke was best one of night.

[Dubey 1,035]

I watched 30 seconds of him trying and failing to be funny and getting booed and it made me physically uncomfortable so I turned it off.

[Balloon guy 158]

Trump stuck it to the two faced politicians in the room who have begged him for money for years and now are saying he's an awful person.

 

The real joke he played was giving them all the middle finger.

 

But the "Pardon me" joke was gold

[BigDMcGee 3,352]

Say what you will about Obama, he has great comedic timing. Clinton does not.

[Dubey 1,035]

Obama is a world class public speaker.

[Dubey 1,035]

"Michelle Obama gives a speech, everyone loves it. Melania gives the exact same speech, people get on her case"

 

 

Did trump say this? That's actually really funny.

[FCP Bob 1,312]

"Michelle Obama gives a speech, everyone loves it. Melania gives the exact same speech, people get on her case"

 

 

Did trump say this? That's actually really funny.

 

he can put his wife down but never himself. Impossible for him to be self-deprecating.

[Fenxis 99]

Al Smith dinner was okay.

 

Donald started strong, then fell apart.

 

Hillary was off on timing and had almost as many lame jokes.

 

His "Pardon Me" joke was best one of night.

 

IMHO the "Mike Pence will deny that Trump was ever here" joke was better. And hey Clinton didn't get booed multiple times, and generally stuck to the tradition of using self-deprecating jokes instead of going for the opponents jugular.

[Fenxis 99]

Say what you will about Obama, he has great comedic timing. Clinton does not.

 

http://www.vox.com/a/hillary-clinton-interview/the-gap-listener-leadership-quality

 

It's a pretty long article but a bit of a behind the scenes profile.

 

tldr she can kick back and be pretty sarcastic and funny. But let's be honest in this current political climate where every slip gets PR spun into a mountain it's no wonder she is a bit wooden and sticks to canned answers.

[FCP Bob 1,312]

this is pretty funny

 

https://twitter.com/...211315541770240

 

and this too

 

[Fenxis 99]

Democrats are much better than Republicans at ignoring their own morals and ethics to support each other.

 

So nevermind that Trump is the antithesis of absolutely everything Sanders represents we should instead support Trump because, even through he has way worse morals/ethics and most Republicans suppressed their inner opinions that the guy is batshit insane, they've grown a spine in the last month?

 

tldr: vote for the con artist because the Republicans realized in the last month it was a really bad idea?

[Scrim 115]

One thing Trump stands for that I absolutely support is the de-monopolizing of health care insurance interests. If we can break that shitshow up, real competition would happen and we'd finally have a Wal Mart of health care that would provide mediocre but adequate insurance at truly low prices.

 

Hillary, on the other hand, has a proven track record of being a proponent of a single payer national plan, so the hope is that she takes Hussein Healthcare a step further and expands the blanket of single payer protections until pricate insurance rackets are sobbing big, satisfying tears since they cannot compete with the .gov's ability to purchase or regulate.

 

Overall, I think a better 'next step' is Trump's plan, unless Hillary can make the push for a decisive national plan and make it stick. If so, it puts Obama into Top 5, since everyone knew that Obamacare was really the groundwork for the RED COMMIE NATIONAL HEALTH PLAN that we desperately need.

 

It's all moot at this point, though. Trump could have won but he burned himself down. It's going to be Hillary, which isn't so bad. I actually respect her ability to operate. The worst part will be listening to her retard constituency gloat and proclaim personal victory, as if they were anything other than a herd of useful idiots.

[Fenxis 99]

Overall, I think a better 'next step' is Trump's plan, unless Hillary can make the push for a decisive national plan and make it stick. If so, it puts Obama into Top 5, since everyone knew that Obamacare was really the groundwork for the RED COMMIE NATIONAL HEALTH PLAN that we desperately need.

 

There's no doubt that the current US health care is a messy compromise between a nationalized system and not f'ing over the health insurance companies.

 

https://en.wikipedia...ture_per_capita

 

So American's pay double per capita than anyone else which, combined with the fact that many do not afford it at all, pushes that number even higher. A total ripoff and complete inefficient use of resources and perpetuates poverty. On the other hand the current system is so much more flow efficient (rather than resource efficient) and better for the rich I doubt there is a ton of interest in changing it.

 

And by extension if health care becomes a national concern than there will be more pressure for companies to create healthier food and people to eat it. I just don't see people overcoming their distrust of government to get there.

[BigDMcGee 3,352]

 

 

It's all moot at this point, though. Trump could have won but he burned himself down. It's going to be Hillary, which isn't so bad. I actually respect her ability to operate. The worst part will be listening to her retard constituency gloat and proclaim personal victory, as if they were anything other than a herd of useful idiots.

 

I've wondered why you haven't supported her more, given your Nixon love. She seems like Nixon 2.0 to me.

[FCP Bob 1,312]

I've wondered why you haven't supported her more, given your Nixon love. She seems like Nixon 2.0 to me.

 

but Trump has the yugest enemies list all prepared for his 1st 100 days

[BigDMcGee 3,352]

but Trump has the yugest enemies list all prepared for his 1st 100 days

 

http://www.rawstory.com/2016/10/billionaire-richard-branson-trump-once-invited-me-to-lunch-to-share-his-bizarre-revenge-fantasies/#.WAsbFB8ZGik.twitter

[Scrim 115]

I've wondered why you haven't supported her more, given your Nixon love. She seems like Nixon 2.0 to me.

 

She's not in Nixon's league, but she definitely operates on generally the same ball field.

 

Also, Nixon wasn't really in anyone's pocket like she is. People will argue otherwise and claim this or that but for the most part, Nixon was his own man. She's a massive puppet... but deep down in her soul there's an old fashioned college-campus commie who, at minimum, should get health care done.

 

Lets not forget she has a yuuuuuuge chip on her shoulder about that given the fiasco in 1993. She will want revenge on Healthcare and with a more workable congress and a leftist Supreme Court, she may be able to get it done.

[FCP Bob 1,312]

http://www.rawstory....FB8ZGik.twitter

 

it would be a really interesting academic exercise to see just how far the career government people would go in helping Trump attack his enemies. Would the National Security Black Ops people for example plant kiddie porn on Rosie O'Donnell's computer and give Mark Cuban a Polonium headache.

[Balloon guy 158]

Clinton's move $1.8 billion to Quatar

 

I wonder if anyone can do the math for me.

 

They gave away 90% of their donations, and have $1.8B left to hide if she loses election.

 

So what did she start with?

 

They must have gotten a lot of donations....

 

 

You know, cause they donated so much of it...

 

To get the high rating and all...

 

And the tax deductions...

[FCP Bob 1,312]

Clinton's move $1.8 billion to Quatar

 

I wonder if anyone can do the math for me.

 

They gave away 90% of their donations, and have $1.8B left to hide if she loses election.

 

So what did she start with?

 

They must have gotten a lot of donations....

 

 

You know, cause they donated so much of it...

 

To get the high rating and all...

 

And the tax deductions...

 

Nice Reddit thread on a rumour put out by the KGB. Oh and Reddit deleted the original post in the thread because it's well bullshit.

 

I think this comment sum it up.

 

[–]throwmeawayinalake 21 points 4 days ago

It's a rumor at this point the only source is a Russian Ministry of Finance report.

 

TLDR:

 

Can Confirm banks are warning of shittyness ahead.

Can't confirm money was transferred Clinton > Qatar, nor how much.

only quoted original source is the 'MoF report'

all subsequent articles use this as their main source.

 

Those Silly Russians

[Dubey 1,035]

BG stating wild conspiracy theory as fact is just standard operating procedure around here

[Fenxis 99]

BG stating wild conspiracy theory as fact is just standard operating procedure around here

 

And sadly also for Trump, who had a decent early Brexit style campaign, seems to have hooked his wagon to the alt-right conspiracy theorists. The only way he can be considered less of a liar than Clinton (maybe) if you exclude all of the shit that he gets wrong (like Obama founded ISIS even though he was only a Senator at the time) because he just makes stuff up on the spot. Oh I guess all of the "I never said that" even though we have the tweets / video tape.

 

A few pages back there was a whole bunch of stuff about Haiti... still have a browser tab open to http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/oct/19/mike-pence/pence-wrong-haiti-contracts-steered-clinton-friend/

 

Pence said that State Department officials steered Haiti relief contracts to friends of the Clintons. That charge rests on a news report based on emails between the State Department and the Clinton Foundation.

Those emails show only that well-connected people saw their offers of help put on a fast track. Neither the emails nor a search of government contract databases show that the government gave contracts to any of those people or their firms to help in Haiti.

 

 

--

 

 

Also I love how Trump (at the Al Smith dinner) labels Clinton for "hating Christians" as there was an email where someone complained about politicians who fake being religious and hooking into the evangelical vote (ie: Donald Trump), who only "stopped" being a birther because he thought he could pin it on Clinton, never apologized for insisting that Obama is Muslim, has never apologized to Obama's priest for calling him a fake and called the actual Pope "disgraceful" and "a pawn of the Mexican government" https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/feb/18/donald-trump-pope-francis-christian-wall-mexico-border. I guess he doesn't hate all Catholics, only "Roman" Catholics -- to bad for him the Al Smith was one.

 

--

 

As much as I am happy that the 2005 tapes have put the breaks on hit campaign and raised awareness about sexual assault/ etc it's a shame it's come to this point and a shame that Trump is rebounding somewhat in the polls.

[FCP Bob 1,312]

And sadly also for Trump, who had a decent early Brexit style campaign, seems to have hooked his wagon to the alt-right conspiracy theorists. The only way he can be considered less of a liar than Clinton (maybe) if you exclude all of the shit that he gets wrong (like Obama founded ISIS even though he was only a Senator at the time) because he just makes stuff up on the spot. Oh I guess all of the "I never said that" even though we have the tweets / video tape.

 

A few pages back there was a whole bunch of stuff about Haiti... still have a browser tab open to http://www.politifac...clinton-friend/

 

Pence said that State Department officials steered Haiti relief contracts to friends of the Clintons. That charge rests on a news report based on emails between the State Department and the Clinton Foundation.

Those emails show only that well-connected people saw their offers of help put on a fast track. Neither the emails nor a search of government contract databases show that the government gave contracts to any of those people or their firms to help in Haiti.

 

 

--

 

 

Also I love how Trump (at the Al Smith dinner) labels Clinton for "hating Christians" as there was an email where someone complained about politicians who fake being religious and hooking into the evangelical vote (ie: Donald Trump), who only "stopped" being a birther because he thought he could pin it on Clinton, never apologized for insisting that Obama is Muslim, has never apologized to Obama's priest for calling him a fake and called the actual Pope "disgraceful" and "a pawn of the Mexican government" https://www.theguard...-mexico-border. I guess he doesn't hate all Catholics, only "Roman" Catholics -- to bad for him the Al Smith was one.

 

--

 

As much as I am happy that the 2005 tapes have put the breaks on hit campaign and raised awareness about sexual assault/ etc it's a shame it's come to this point and a shame that Trump is rebounding somewhat in the polls.

 

Also don't forget that Trump's Father was arrested at a KKK riot in Queens that was partly set off by the prospect of Al Smith becoming the 1st Catholic Governor of NY State and possibly President. You can bet Trump got an earful of hate at the dinner table as a kid growing up.

 

http://www.thedailyb...ith-dinner.html

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/02/28/in-1927-donald-trumps-father-was-arrested-after-a-klan-riot-in-queens/

[Fenxis 99]

tldr: the amount of double standards in this election blows my mind (not a fan of this rants focus on Clinton's gender, though that doesn't help).

 

http://www.dailykos....-have-ever-seen

 

3) Money — OK let’s talk about her money. Hillary has a lot of it. And she has earned most of it through well-paid speaking fees. And the idea of getting paid $200,000 or more for a single speech seems so ludicrous to many people that they assume that it simply must be some form of bribery. But the truth is that there is a large, well-established and extremely lucrative industry for speaking and appearance fees. And within that industry many celebrities, sports stars, business leaders and former politicians get paid very well. At her most popular for example, Paris Hilton was being paid as much as $750,000 just to make an appearance. Kylie Jenner was once paid over $100,000 to go to her own birthday party, and to this day Vanilla Ice gets $15,000 simply to show up with his hat turned sideways.

 

And let’s talk about the more cerebral cousin of the appearance agreement, which is the speaking engagement. Is $200k really that unusual? In fact “All American Speakers”, the agency that represents Clinton, currently represents 135 people whose MINIMUM speaking fee is $200,000. Some of the luminaries that get paid this much include: Guy Fieri, Ang Lee, Carla Delevingne, Chelsea Handler, Elon Musk, Mehmet Oz, Michael Phelps, Nate Berkus, and “Larry the Cable Guy”. And no that last one is not a joke. And if you drop the speaking fee to $100k, the number of people they represent jumps to over 500. At $50,000 the number jumps to over 1,200. And All American Speakers are obviously not the only agency that represents speakers. So there are in fact thousands of people getting paid this kind of money to give a speech.

 

For millions of Americans struggling to pay their bills, the very idea that someone can make $100,000 or more for just giving a speech or hanging out at a Vegas nightclub is obscene. But as Richard Nixon used to say, “don’t hate the player, hate the game.” Hillary didn’t invent the speaking engagement industry, and she isn’t anywhere near the first person to make a lot of money from it. And while her fees are in the upper range of what speakers make, neither they nor the total amount of money she has made are unusual. It’s just unusual FOR A WOMAN.

 

And yes, I’m back on that, because I feel compelled to point out that before he ran for President in 2007, Rudy Giuliani was making about $700,000 a month in speaking fees with an average of $270k per speech. It’s estimated that in the 5 years before his run he earned as much as $40 million in speaking fees. Nobody cared, no accusations of impropriety were made, and there was almost no media interest. So why did Giuliani get a pass, while Hillary stands accused of inherent corruption for making less money doing the same thing?

 

And speaking of corruption, after leaving the Florida governor’s office Jeb Bush made millions of dollars in paid speeches. This includes large sums he collected from a South Korean metals company that reaped over a BILLION dollars in contracts from his brother’s presidential administration. Speaking to an Indian newspaper about this type of thing Bush said, “This is the life of being the brother of the president.” Do you remember reading all about that while Jeb was running for President? I didn’t think so. Jeb got a pass too.

 

So if this discussion is really about money in politics that’s fine. But I’m going to need someone to explain to me why we only seem to focus on it when the person making the money has a vagina.

 

4) Wall Street — First things first. No, the majority of the money Clinton has made from speaking fees did not come from Wall Street. In fact it’s not even close. She has given nearly 100 paid speeches since leaving the State Dept., and only 8 were to “Wall Street” banks. Nearly all of her speeches were to organizations like American Camping Association, Ebay, Cisco, Xerox, Cardiovascular Research Foundation, United Fresh Produce Association, International Deli-Dairy-Bakery Association, California Medial Association, A&E Television Networks, Massachusetts Conference for Women, U.S. Green Building Council, National Association of Realtors, American Society of Travel Agents, Gap, National Association of Convenience Stores, the National Association of Chain Drug Stores, Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries, etc.

 

Corporations and Associations pay large fees for important speakers all of the time. And Hillary got booked fairly often because she is interesting and popular, and because there’s a great deal of status attached to having her speak at an event. Ignoring all of this however, a large contingent of anti-Hillary people continue to insist that all speaker’s fees from Wall Street banks were bribes, and that because of this they “own” her. But by that logic shouldn’t we all be asking what the **** the American Camping Association is up to?

 

Also, with the possible exception of one speech given to Deutsche Bank, all of Hillary’s 8 speeches to Wall Street were for a speaking fee of $225,000. That does not even break the top 20 of her highest paid speeches. For example she received over $275,000 each in three speeches she gave to The Vancouver Board of Trade, the Board of Trade of Metropolitan Montreal, and Canada 2020. So apparently Canadians also “own” her. And I don’t know what those nefarious Canadians are up to, but it probably has something to do with goddamn poutine. Which would really piss me off except I just remembered that I kind of like poutine so never mind.

 

Listen, does Wall Street have influence with Hillary? Grow up, of course they do. Wall Street is one of the key engines of the American economy, and as such has enormous influence with everyone. EVERYONE. Don’t kid yourself on that point. And aside from anything else, she was a 2-term Senator of New York, and this made Wall Street an important corporate member of her constituency. The issue is not influence. The issue is whether or not paid speeches and campaign donations alone are proof of corruption. And they’re not. And the last time I checked there was an important difference between association and guilt, between proof and slander.

 

And again: why is Hillary being held to a standard that never appears to be applied to her male counterparts? Am I not supposed to notice that a media frenzy has been aimed at Hillary Clinton for accepting speaking fees of $225,000 while Donald Trump has been paid $1.5 MILLION on numerous occasions with hardly a word said about it? Am I supposed to not notice that we are now in an election season in which Donald Trump, a proud scam artist whose involvement in “Trump University” alone is being defined by the New York Attorney General as “straight-up fraud”, is regularly calling Hillary Clinton “Crooked Hillary” and getting away with it?

 

What the actual **** is going on here? What’s going on is what we all know, but mostly don’t want to admit: presidential campaigns favor men, and the men who campaign in them are rewarded for those traits perceived as being “manly” - physical size, charisma, forceful personality, assertiveness, boldness and volume. Women who evince those same traits however are usually punished rather than rewarded, and a lot of the negativity aimed at Hillary over the years, especially when she is seeking office, has been due to these underlying biases. There is simply no question that Hillary has for years been on the business end of an unrelenting double standard. And her battle with societal sexism isn’t going to stop because of her success anymore than Obama’s battle with racism stopped once he was elected. These are generational issues, and we are who we are.

 

And actually, this only makes her victory all the more amazing. And maybe it’s OK if we pause for a moment from the accusations and paranoia and just acknowledge her enormous accomplishments. In the entire history of our nation, only 6 Presidents have also served as Secretary of State. Only 3 have served both as Secretary of State and in Congress. By any objective measure Hillary Clinton is not just the most qualified candidate this season, she’s one of the most qualified people to ever seek the office. The New York Times in endorsing her stated that, “voters have the chance to choose one of the most broadly and deeply qualified presidential candidates in history.” Jonathan Bernstein at Bloomberg stated that, “she is probably the best qualified presidential candidate ever.” Even Marco Rubio, one-time choice of the GOP establishment (and tea-party love-child) stated in a Republican debate that, “If this is a resume contest, Hillary Clinton is going to be the new President of the United States.”