Hillary Clinton is losing her mind and the election...(thank God)...2016


Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Gary7 said:

Why do Republicans voters love Trump?

 

 

Now I have some business to take care off so go on and continue trying to defend Hillary if you can.

Being anti-Trump doesn't mean we're immediately pro-Clinton. I cannot support someone who has total disregard for the people, and laws of this country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Dot Matrix said:

Being anti-Trump doesn't mean we're immediately pro-Clinton. I cannot support someone who has total disregard for the people, and laws of this country.

Reading that article .... this really seems like the "go to" line for Trump when he doesn't know the answer or have a plan.  I dare not play a drinking game for every time he speaks this line ... for I would suffer alcohol poisoning. 

 

"We are looking at that. We are looking at that,” Trump responded. “We’re looking at a lot of things.”

 

/sigh.  He doesn't have any plans.  Except a wall...I guess?  Banning Muslims?  Some tax plan that will benefit the wealthy greatly.  Other than that .... he is just looking into a "lot of things". :) 

 

And this line from the same article ....

When asked asked about whether Burkas should be banned in “schools, courts, and bordered checkpoints” in the United States during a February interview with Boston Herald Radio, Trump said “I’m okay with it. I know you’re shocked to hear me say it right? I’m okay with it.”

 

He is pro-bullying Muslim women into abandoning their cultural traditions and religious obligations...yep...that is the Trump way!   Doesn't France have a burqa ban?  Hmmm...yea .... how is that working out?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Dot Matrix said:

Being anti-Trump doesn't mean we're immediately pro-Clinton. I cannot support someone who has total disregard for the people, and laws of this country.

Lets combat pointless rhetoric with more pointless rhetoric. Seems people are good at finding the most pointless ###### to complain about on both sides. Whether or not he's okay with it doesn't mean he'd do it, nor does it mean he has the authority to do it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Emn1ty said:

Lets combat pointless rhetoric with more pointless rhetoric. Seems people are good at finding the most pointless ###### to complain about on both sides. Whether or not he's okay with it doesn't mean he'd do it, nor does it mean he has the authority to do it.

How is it pointless?  Or...what do you define as "pointless rhetoric"?  Is attacking Muslims cultural/religious freedoms (i.e. Burqa) pointless?  Is everything negative about Trump (either warranted or not) ... pointless?  Everything Trump or Clinton say should and can be scrutinized ... they are vying for the top seat in the US.  What they say ... isn't "pointless" ... and regardless if they have the authority to act on their words ... you can learn about their character or what they stand for.

 

Not pointless.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, DocM said:

The old definition earned in the 1990's by that old leftie Ted Turner still holds:

 

CNN = Clinton News Network

This is what John Kerry said .... what does CNN have to do with it?  You can disagree with what he said ... but what does attacking the news source achieve?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, DocM said:

The old definition earned in the 1990's by that old leftie Ted Turner still holds:

 

CNN = Clinton News Network

Clinton News Network? Every time I turn on their "news" it's always about Trump. The news networks are the reason we are in the boat we're in. They covered Trump entirely far too much in the primaries and neglected real, viable candidates that couldn't ever get any airtime as they knew Trump would be a cash cow for ratings. 

Edited by shockz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, jjkusaf said:

This is what John Kerry said .... what does CNN have to do with it?  You can disagree with what he said ... but what does attacking the news source achieve?

Because regardless of how much coverage each candidate receives on CNN or the other Clinton shill sources, a generic Clintons negative stuff will be minimized as much as possible, or on the equivalent of Section F, Page 23. Or assigned to one of their acolytes. Most likely all of the above. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, illegaloperation said:

...and what does that have to do with me?

Not a damn thing the posts merged or don't you know that happens yet?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, DocM said:

Because regardless of how much coverage each candidate receives on CNN or the other Clinton shill sources, a generic Clintons negative stuff will be minimized as much as possible, or on the equivalent of Section F, Page 23. Or assigned to one of their acolytes. Most likely all of the above. 

Is Kerry Clinton's running mate?  

 

Sorry...still failing to see the connection with Kerry and...as you stated..."Clinton News Network"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, jjkusaf said:

How is it pointless?  Or...what do you define as "pointless rhetoric"?  Is attacking Muslims cultural/religious freedoms (i.e. Burqa) pointless?  Is everything negative about Trump (either warranted or not) ... pointless?  Everything Trump or Clinton say should and can be scrutinized ... they are vying for the top seat in the US.  What they say ... isn't "pointless" ... and regardless if they have the authority to act on their words ... you can learn about their character or what they stand for.

 

Not pointless.

It's pointless because he didn't say he'd do anything, only said he'd be "okay with it". Okay with a hypothetical scenario that may never actually come up. That's like me saying I'd be okay with ice cream right now. Well unfortunately I don't have ice cream so me being okay with said ice cream is irrelevant.

It's fine to scrutinize people for what they say, but scrutinize relevant things rather than answers to questions that provide scenarios that have not yet and probably never will come to pass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, jjkusaf said:

Is Kerry Clinton's running mate?  

 

Sorry...still failing to see the connection with Kerry and...as you stated..."Clinton News Network"

Please parse better. I was agreeing with what Gary7 posted in its entirety, which demonstrates my 'CNN has little veracity wrt the Clintons' comment.

 

Quote

2 hours ago, Gary7 said:


Secretary of State John Kerry said a recent spate of terror attacks in Western countries means ISIS is “on the run.” Watch CNNgo

CNN also said the above which is not true.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Emn1ty said:

It's pointless because he didn't say he'd do anything, only said he'd be "okay with it". Okay with a hypothetical scenario that may never actually come up. That's like me saying I'd be okay with ice cream right now. Well unfortunately I don't have ice cream so me being okay with said ice cream is irrelevant.

It's fine to scrutinize people for what they say, but scrutinize relevant things rather than answers to questions that provide scenarios that have not yet and probably never will come to pass.

Aaaah.  OK.  So selective hearing/listening.  Regarding your bad ice cream analogy .... a better one is that you don't like ice cream .... so no one can have ice cream.  Being "ok" with infringing on one's religious beliefs, especially for a POTUS hopefully, should be scrutinized.  What he, or Hillary says, are relevant ... even if you agree or disagree with it.

 

4 minutes ago, DocM said:

Please parse better. I was agreeing with what Gary7 posted in its entirety, which demonstrates my 'CNN has little veracity wrt the Clintons' comment.

Still...what does it have to do with Clinton?  Not-a-thing.  Did CNN say that ISIS is on the run ... or did they just report what Kerry said.  If CNN said that ISIS is on the run .... source?  All I see is "Kerry: ISIS 'is on the run' despite recent terror attacks"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, jjkusaf said:

Aaaah.  OK.  So selective hearing/listening.  Regarding your bad ice cream analogy .... a better one is that you don't like ice cream .... so no one can have ice cream.  Being "ok" with infringing on one's religious beliefs, especially for a POTUS hopefully, should be scrutinized.  What he, or Hillary says, are relevant ... even if you agree or disagree with it.

 

Still...what does it have to do with Clinton?  Not-a-thing.  Did CNN say that ISIS is on the run ... or did they just report what Kerry said.  If CNN said that ISIS is on the run .... source?  All I see is "Kerry: ISIS 'is on the run' despite recent terror attacks"

Watch the Video it is on CNN. What does it have to do with Clinton? Most of your posts had nothing to do with Clinton.:p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Gary7 said:

Watch the Video it is on CNN. What does it have to do with Clinton? Most of your posts had nothing to do with Clinton.:p

Thank you .... that was my point with regards to this comment ....

 

1 hour ago, DocM said:

The old definition earned in the 1990's by that old leftie Ted Turner still holds:

 

CNN = Clinton News Network

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clinton is running and not disconnected from this silly theory of the administration that IS is on the run. In fact, she's been saying the same thing.

 

Quote

 

 

She had Kerry's job and was instrumental in this US policy while at State, and supports the administration now.

Edited by DocM
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, DocM said:

Clinton is running and not disconnected from this silly theory of the administration that IS is on the run. In fact, she's been saying the same thing since 2014.

 

She had Kerry's job and was instrumental in this US policy while at State, and supports the administration now. 

So...did she claim ISIS on the run?  She hasn't been SecState for what... over 3 years now?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, jjkusaf said:

So...did she claim ISIS on the run?  She hasn't been SecState for what... over 3 years now?

 

Democrat debate-

 

Quote

"We Now Finally Are Where We Need To Be" (against ISIS)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Gary7 said:

What...because you can not explain why you brought Kerry's comments into this thread about Clinton ... and someone else makes a comment regarding the "Clinton News Network" .... just because they reported said Kerry comments?

 

Talk about dragging things off point ... your Kerry post did that.

 

2 minutes ago, DocM said:

"Secure" ad, Hillary For America, 12/20/15

In that ad she says ....

 

"America is not just electing a president. We're also electing a commander-in-chief. That choice matters, because strengthening the economy, making healthcare more affordable, raising incomes - all of that depends on us being both secure at home and leading the world. I will get up every single day and do whatever it takes to make sure our country is safe and strong. I'm Hillary Clinton and I approve this message.

 

Missing: "ISIS is on the run"

 

Quote

Despite Recent Attacks And Growing Concerns From The American Public, Clinton Declared "We Now Finally Are Where We Need To Be" Against ISIS

Talking about pulling something out of context.  Here is what she said....which was posted on the GOP website .... not sure of the fallacy behind or why the GOP is even bothered (guess they are stretching).  You know neither candidate will be able to wave a magic wand and make ISIS or other terrorist organizations disappear.

 

 

Once again...neither has to do with CNN reporting what Kerry stated.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, jjkusaf said:

What...because you can not explain why you brought Kerry's comments into this thread about Clinton ... and someone else makes a comment regarding the "Clinton News Network" .... just because they reported said Kerry comments?

 

Talk about dragging things off point ... your Kerry post did that.

 

In that ad she says ....

 

"America is not just electing a president. We're also electing a commander-in-chief. That choice matters, because strengthening the economy, making healthcare more affordable, raising incomes - all of that depends on us being both secure at home and leading the world. I will get up every single day and do whatever it takes to make sure our country is safe and strong. I'm Hillary Clinton and I approve this message.

 

Missing: "ISIS is on the run"

 

Talking about pulling something out of context.  Here is what she said....which was posted on the GOP website .... not sure of the fallacy behind or why the GOP is even bothered (guess they are stretching).  You know neither candidate will be able to wave a magic wand and make ISIS or other terrorist organizations disappear.

 

 

Once again...neither has to do with CNN reporting what Kerry stated.

I did not bring Kerry into this thread he was brought into before I post try to keep up.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.