You're right they would just be handed the Vice Presidency, I'm sure they hammered him with being a racist first for inferring he was going to shoot the first halfrican american president though...again JUST KIDDINGAutomatik;1806576 wrote:What is your point here?
If a presidential candidate said that today they for sure would be getting bashed like Trump is now.
Is she ideal, nope, but I do like a lot of her foreign policies. Her domestic and liberal leanings, especially late I am meh on. No one of them will happen, so it is pandering.like_that;1806570 wrote:Ptown, because he is too much of a coward to answer legitimate questions about Hillary. It's ok (I guess) to admit she sucks ass, but also vote for her as an anti trump vote. I get that, but don't be a puss and avoid reasonable questions about Hillary by deflecting back to Trump.
I would categorize boatshoes as a liberal Quaker on a bit of lesser scale.
Yeah. Federal contractor out here in the area.bases_loaded;1806571 wrote:Does Ptown work in DC?
QuakerOats;1806583 wrote:Yet, some people do actually get taken out, but if it is done to protect Clinton or the dems, it is ok:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/08/10/assange-implies-murdered-dnc-staffer-was-wikileaks-source.html
Assange implies murdered DNC staffer was source of leaks ....
Wow - don't mess with the Clinton machine.
Hate to agree with Zwick, but this.ZWICK 4 PREZ;1806566 wrote:other than isadore, I don't think anyone is telling you Hillary is the answer...hell I don't think anyone else is saying she's a good candidate. However, when you compare the two idiots... there's no question, to me, she's more fit to be president. She's actually developed policy, shes actually worked in congress to pass said legislations, and she's done it on both sides of the aisle. Does her policy reflect mine?... no.. well it does when she started stealing Bernie's.. but overall no b/c it's just bullshit to get votes. But there's no question she'd be a billion times more effective than Trump. Not to mention she doesn't lose her shit whenever someone talks about her.. which is pretty important for President.
Broken clocks. If Alex Jones says that the earth is round, he's not wrong.Dr.Pizza;1806478 wrote:Its comical that some of the people on here who i wont put on blast that use infowars as a actual source of information and media. Alex Jones is a whacky bat! haha no offense but i would trust him more than i could toss him and that is being modest. If you want to lost all credibility with me than you should you can keep using alex jones as a reliable source for information cause i for one am not a fan of his!
Anytime I hear someone say something like this in a serious tone, I realize that I am incapable of rolling my eyes hard enough to convey my thoughts.Automatik;1806527 wrote:But he's so not PC bro! Don't you love it?
Actually, it's called an implication. He was implying that gun right "nuts" should/can do something about Hillary.ZWICK 4 PREZ;1806548 wrote:What the Donald did was called an inference. Inferring gun right nuts should/can do something about Hillary.
I still maintain that neither is fit to be president. However, if anyone is getting upset that those who support neither candidate are spending more time on The Donald, this is why. There are very few vocal apologists for Clinton. Even those who sound as though they'll be voting for her are treating her like a bitter pill. It's harder to argue with someone who is forthright about the fact that their choice isn't a particularly good one.ZWICK 4 PREZ;1806566 wrote:other than isadore, I don't think anyone is telling you Hillary is the answer...hell I don't think anyone else is saying she's a good candidate.
Probably. Still...one of them will be our next president though.O-Trap;1806603 wrote: I still maintain that neither is fit to be president. However, if anyone is getting upset that those who support neither candidate are spending more time on The Donald, this is why. There are very few vocal apologists for Clinton. Even those who sound as though they'll be voting for her are treating her like a bitter pill. It's harder to argue with someone who is forthright about the fact that their choice isn't a particularly good one.
Except.................no one here has ever said Trump is the greatest candidate of all time and has no imperfections, which you are implying, and I inferred.O-Trap;1806603 wrote:I still maintain that neither is fit to be president. However, if anyone is getting upset that those who support neither candidate are spending more time on The Donald, this is why. There are very few vocal apologists for Clinton. Even those who sound as though they'll be voting for her are treating her like a bitter pill. It's harder to argue with someone who is forthright about the fact that their choice isn't a particularly good one.
That is not what I implied. You're putting my words into a false dichotomy. The options are not only "unfit" or "the greatest candidate of all time [without] imperfections."QuakerOats;1806610 wrote:Except.................no one here has ever said Trump is the greatest candidate of all time and has no imperfections, which you are implying, and I inferred.
Spock;1806480 wrote:the media is blowing this out
I get that. Point is candidates for president say things they probably should not. Obama has said he has done so himself. He has criticised Trump for being on a different level.ZWICK 4 PREZ;1806548 wrote:That's called an idiom that's been used for years. I'm sure when you watched that video, it wasn't the first time you had heard that saying.
I would not flip out about either comment. The problem is the Donald has made himself and his big mouth the focus. Everyone in the Media is just waiting for the next slip. So these little statements are blown up out of proportion. The ones people should really be disturbed by is his comment concerning nuclear proliferation. Like having to walk back statements about South Korea and Japan nuking up.ZWICK 4 PREZ;1806548 wrote:What the Donald did was called an inference. Inferring gun right nuts should/can do something about Hillary.
People are about equally divided in their distaste for both candidates, yet one is getting much more facetime. Why is that?$91 million for Team Clinton, versus $8 million for Team Trump
Umm ...Dr.Pizza;1806641 wrote:Theyve have won there last 8 games and have been one of the best teams since the break. A lot of people were writing them off at the break but they rebounded well. Arrieta needed a win and he got it. The bats have come to life as late. I dont think it is out of this world to say Kris Bryant is the NL()national league MVP.
you are killing this internet thingDr.Pizza;1806641 wrote:Theyve have won there last 8 games and have been one of the best teams since the break. A lot of people were writing them off at the break but they rebounded well. Arrieta needed a win and he got it. The bats have come to life as late. I dont think it is out of this world to say Kris Bryant is the NL()national league MVP.
CenterBHSFan;1806633 wrote:I found this interesting: http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/team-clinton-now-outspending-trump-ads-52-million-0-n626236
People are about equally divided in their distaste for both candidates, yet one is getting much more facetime. Why is that?
It is pretty simple. As Bloomberg put it Hillary is competent and sane.like_that;1806567 wrote:I would place partisan coward ptown and liberal apologist boatshoes in that group as well.
I would say I support Hillary wholeheartedly and think she will be a decent president. That doesn't mean I am not painfully aware of her many flaws and that there aren't people I would rather take to the dance.ZWICK 4 PREZ;1806569 wrote:Really? I guess I don't pay attention too much. I know isadore definitely does. Of my liberal friends, there's not one who isn't holding their nose and voting for her. And I know that's how some Republicans feel about voting for Trump and not Hillary. But I don't know any people personally who are excited for either candidate. I mean i see people on Facebook I guess.. but no one I personally talk to supports either one wholeheartedly.
Lot of working man money to pay Mar-A-Lago as a vendor with.QuakerOats;1806747 wrote:Trump raised $80 million in July. Struck a nerve with Team Corruption: http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/Clinton-Campaign-Trump-July-Fundraising/2016/08/08/id/742681/
LOL of course, the compromise always has to be to the left. Lets compromise, you agree with me and we'll agree to agree.BoatShoes;1806755 wrote:. I would vote for Rob Portman over Ted Strickland if he would disavow Trump like Kasich has.