What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Official Hillary Clinton 2016 thread (8 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Current implied odds of each candidate winning, using odds at Oddschecker:

Code: 
[COLOR=rgb(102,0,102)]Clinton[/COLOR][COLOR=rgb(0,0,0)]	[/COLOR][COLOR=rgb(0,102,102)]64.0[/COLOR][COLOR=rgb(102,102,0)]%[/COLOR][COLOR=rgb(0,0,0)]
[/COLOR][COLOR=rgb(102,0,102)]Trump[/COLOR][COLOR=rgb(0,0,0)]	[/COLOR][COLOR=rgb(0,102,102)]21.3[/COLOR][COLOR=rgb(102,102,0)]%[/COLOR][COLOR=rgb(0,0,0)]
[/COLOR][COLOR=rgb(102,0,102)]Cruz[/COLOR][COLOR=rgb(0,0,0)]	[/COLOR][COLOR=rgb(0,102,102)]4.6[/COLOR][COLOR=rgb(102,102,0)]%[/COLOR][COLOR=rgb(0,0,0)]
[/COLOR][COLOR=rgb(102,0,102)]Sanders[/COLOR][COLOR=rgb(0,0,0)]	[/COLOR][COLOR=rgb(0,102,102)]4.2[/COLOR][COLOR=rgb(102,102,0)]%[/COLOR][COLOR=rgb(0,0,0)]
[/COLOR][COLOR=rgb(102,0,102)]Kasich[/COLOR][COLOR=rgb(0,0,0)]	[/COLOR][COLOR=rgb(0,102,102)]3.1[/COLOR][COLOR=rgb(102,102,0)]%[/COLOR][COLOR=rgb(0,0,0)]
[/COLOR][COLOR=rgb(102,0,102)]Rubio[/COLOR][COLOR=rgb(0,0,0)]	[/COLOR][COLOR=rgb(0,102,102)]2.8[/COLOR][COLOR=rgb(102,102,0)]%[/COLOR][COLOR=rgb(0,0,0)]
	
[/COLOR][COLOR=rgb(102,0,102)]Dem[/COLOR][COLOR=rgb(0,0,0)]	[/COLOR][COLOR=rgb(0,102,102)]68.2[/COLOR][COLOR=rgb(102,102,0)]%[/COLOR][COLOR=rgb(0,0,0)]
[/COLOR][COLOR=rgb(102,0,102)]Rep[/COLOR][COLOR=rgb(0,0,0)]	[/COLOR][COLOR=rgb(0,102,102)]31.8[/COLOR][COLOR=rgb(102,102,0)]%[/COLOR]
 
timschochet said:
Rich Conway said:
I asked this before, I'll ask again for timschochet, who is back to believing that Hillary is pure as the driven snow.

Was anything unethical or otherwise wrong with the pardon of Marc Rich?

Was anything unethical or otherwise wrong with any of the other pardons, including the ones to people who made $250K payments to Hillary's brother?

For the record, notice that I didn't ask if Hillary or Bill was charged with or convicted of a crime.  I'm not asking about crime in any way, just ethics.
Click to expand...
First off the bolded is an overstatement. 

With regard to Marc Rich, at the time I was disturbed by the pardon and I believed it to be a sign of corruption- not by Hillary Clinton but by Bill. However, Bill wrote an op-ed defending it, and I remember reading that and thinking: well, if the stuff he is saying here is true, then the pardon was justified. But that was 15 years ago and I don't remember what those reasons were. 

As for the other pardons, I'm sorry I have even less information about them. 
Click to expand...
I'm having trouble reconciling your admission that you don't know anything about the pardon "scandal" with your accusation that people like me and IvanK have bought into false narratives about the Cintons' ethical shortcomings.  How do you come to the conclusion that it's a false narrative if you don't know anything about it?  Or are we back to "if she wasn't charged, then she didn't do anything wrong"?  And if so, why is it so hard for you to grasp that other people have a much different standard for judging ethics?

 
Sinn Fein said:
:lmao:

Blue Nation Review has endorsed Hillary Clinton.

(David Brock literally bought Blue Nation Review in November)
Click to expand...

 

DIRTY TRICKS


Hillary Clinton’s Hit Men Target Bernie Sanders at Blue Nation Review


The Blue Nation Review seems to have evolved from a blog dedicated to creating ‘a place where progressives can debate’ to an attack dog for Hillary Clinton.

Is a propaganda arm of Hillary Clinton’s presidential juggernaut masquerading as an independent news and opinion site?
That, anyhow, is the charge being leveled by the campaign of Clinton rival Bernie Sanders. They may have a point.
Back in the summer of 2014—when Blue Nation Review was a fledgling blog dedicated to creating “a place where progressives can debate where we want to be as a movement,” per the website’s mission statement—it treated Sanders as a liberal hero.

 


This was 18 months before BNR, as it’s known, started attacking the 74-year-old Sanders with a zeal normally associated with the Republican assault on Benghazi and the former secretary of state’s private email server.
These days the blog celebrates all things Clinton and relentlessly blames the socialist senator from Vermont for nearly every misguided, corrupt, hypocritical, or wretched thing in American democracy—though it does admit, from time to time, that he’s no Donald Trump.
Even before Sunday night’s CNN-sponsored Democratic debate had ended, BNR’s lead story was accusing Sanders of rudeness and sexism under the headline “Women React to Bernie Sanders Telling Hillary ‘I’m Talking.’”
BNR is “the pond scum of American politics,” said Democratic political consultant Tad Devine, a top strategist for Sanders’s campaign against the Democratic frontrunner. “I’m sure they’re going to do whatever it takes to throw mud at Bernie and discredit him and lie about him, and deceive people. And that’s their business. That’s what they do for a living.”
Devine added: “Our approach to most of this is to ignore it, and I suspect that’s all we’ll continue to do.”
It has been, to say the least, a stunning about-face for BNR—and for the blog’s small coterie of loyal readers, a baffling one as well.
 
The website had developed a reputation for reliably liberal opinion, of course, but also on occasion for aggressive reporting; BNR was the first to reveal questionable real estate transactions that, among other violations of the public trust, led to the resignation of Republican House member Aaron Schock of Illinois.
Now, suddenly, it is being seen by some as the journalism equivalent of a Clinton campaign surrogate.
As with an increasing number of political whodunits during this election cycle, the fingerprints of Hillary hit man David Brock are all over the crime scene.
Brock, who didn’t respond to a request for comment, is the famed Clinton antagonist-turned-acolyte, an ardent convert from right-wing attack journalism who founded the liberal-leaning media watchdog organization, Media Matters for America.
Today Brock, a talented organizer and prolific fundraiser, controls a network of pro-Hillary PACs and nonprofits, including Correct the Record (which polices media criticism of Brock’s favorite candidate and deploys rapid responses), as well as the richly funded pro-Clinton super PAC, American Bridge 21st Century.
In early November, Brock formed a separate Delaware corporation, True Blue Media, LLC, in order to purchase an 80 percent controlling interest in BNR from Moko Social Media, a content creator aimed at high school and college students.


In December 2013, Moko’s then-CEO, a hot-tempered Australian named Ian Rodwell, had recruited former Democratic Senate staffer and political operative Jimmy Williams, a frequent cable news talking head, to launch the blog as editor in chief from a newsroom in Alexandria, Virginia.
According to sources familiar with BNR, the blunt-spoken Williams, a Hillary Clinton supporter, frequently clashed with Rodwell over editorial issues, engaging in epic, profanity-laced shouting matches in the newsroom.
Finally, early last fall, Williams enlisted millionaire media entrepreneur and philanthropist Leo Hindery, another member of Team Clinton and a member of Moko’s board of directors, to help him wrest BNR out of Rodwell’s hands.
Hindery, a major donor to Democratic causes, naturally steered the sale to Brock, who in a late-November meeting with Williams in the lobby of a Manhattan hotel informed the founder of BNR that most of his staff would be dismissed and his services were no longer required.
Brock installed as CEO of True Blue Media a longtime Democratic operative named Peter Daou, a diehard Hillary loyalist who had worked in her Senate office and 2008 presidential campaign. Daou declined to comment for this story.
At the time of the sale, Brock gave the Huffington Post a high-minded statement concerning BNR’s mission.
“The need for alternative sources of information and independent reporting has never been greater,” he said, adding that the site would be “a focal point in liberal journalism” and produce investigative stories as well as video. “With the 2016 campaign now fully underway, the time is right for the rise of a new liberal standard-bearer and Blue Nation Review is poised to assume that role.”
Yet BNR, in its current incarnation, seems more a comfortable venue for negative Sanders stories that Brock wasn’t successful in placing with mainstream news outlets like The New York Times and The Washington Post.
An examination of BNR’s Sanders coverage documents the switcheroo since Brock and Daou took over. During Williams’s tenure as editor, for instance, the headline on BNR’s July 28, 2014, story about Sanders, then chairman of the Veterans Affairs Committee, was: “Senator Bernie Sanders and GOP Rep Jeff Miller find pathway to address VA problems.”
Subsequent BNR stories, as Sanders ramped up his seemingly quixotic White House quest, carried headlines such as “5 Awesome Things Bernie Sanders is Doing With His Campaign,” “Bernie Sanders Wants to Bring the Fight to the GOP,” “Bernie Sanders rolls through Virginia riding high,” “Over 110,000 Bernie Backers Pledge to Attend Grassroots Event,” and—on Oct. 29 of last year—“While the GOP Were Embarrassing Themselves at the Debate, Bernie Sanders Was Doing This.”
This last story—a dying burst of positive Sanders coverage—reported: “With most of the political world’s eyes trained on the CNBC GOP Presidential Debate on Wednesday night, Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders held a rally at George Mason University.
“As the Republicans dodged questions about their own divisive rhetoric, Sanders decried Islamophobia and the hate that often follows it.
“BNR BOTTOM LINE: We think Robert F. Kennedy… would be proud.”
After early November came a two-month-long hiatus in which Sanders was barely mentioned—and certainly never again compared to a martyred liberal icon.
Then, on Jan. 19, BNR blasted a group that Daou, a prolific writer, called “a segment of Bernie Sanders supporters.”
“Why do you have to hate Hillary to love Bernie?” Daou demanded. “Why do you have to echo Karl Rove and the GOP in their misogynistic rhetoric? Why do you have to do the dirty work of the far right and tear down one of the most accomplished women in the history of American politics?”
Daou followed up the next day with an article titled, “With Bernie Sanders As Their Nominee, Democrats Can Kiss The Presidency Goodbye.”
Two days later, BNR formally endorsed Clinton for president and subsequent articles carried headlines such as “Why does Bernie Sanders keep denigrating Hillary’s supporters,” “Why did Bernie Sanders sponsor a bill to dump nuclear waste on a low-income Latino community,” “NASTY HIT: top Sanders adviser questions Hillary’s capacity to appoint Scalia replacement,” “Bernie’s dark side: the reckless war on Hillary’s integrity,” and “Bernie Sanders gets gender equality painfully wrong.”
BNR founder Jimmy Williams, for one, barely recognizes the site he helped create. Although he supports Clinton’s campaign, “Bernie Sanders was a great House member and he’s a damn good senator,” Williams said.
“I wish David Brock and his staff the very best of luck in their endeavors,” he added. “I’m proud of what we built when I was there. I’m proud of the original reporting we did and the opinion journalism. And I’m proud that we never took a hit on other Democrats running for president.”
Click to expand...


http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/03/07/hillary-clinton-s-hit-men-target-bernie-sanders-at-blue-nation-review.html?source=socialflow&via=twitter_page&account=thedailybeast&medium=twitter


 
But it's not over yet!

Got a fairly reputable report of very low voter turnout in a very strong Clinton area, downtown Detroit. While Clinton has a lot of room for error in Michigan, this is generally not good news for her when turnout is dead in a major, majority black precinct. We have repeatedly said that Michigan demos very much favor Sanders, but polls do not. Will this signal a better than expected performance? We still don't believe he can win Michigan, but if this precinct is representative of Downtown Detroit, he'll have his shot. The location of the precinct is seen circled here:

Precinct spot

The picture of the precinct in question:

Precinct

Here is the Benchmark Politics writeup on Wayne County (Detroit)

  • County: Wayne
  • Biggest City: Detroit, MI
  • Population: 1,775,703
  • Expected Spread: Clinton +24%
n many ways, the story of Michigan is the story of Detroit. The most populated place in Michigan, many people have treated Detroit as the butt of a cruel joke over the last decade. Detroit has suffered extreme downturns in its economy over the years, be it the gasoline crises of the 1970s, the auto bailout of the late 2000s, or it's recent bankruptcy claims. Detroit is an extremely segregated city, and the race map reflects more on a city that has struggled to rise above in race relations. Overall, the pattern is favorable here for a Clinton victory. At 40% black, it is one of the blackest cities in the north. It has a large number of women - 52%-48% male-female ratio. It also has a non-negligible hispanic population. Though slightly young and lower income, and though it does have a major university in Wayne State, the population by and large does not seem very friendly to Sanders. It is important to watch where the high turnout is in Detroit. Inner city turnout will dramatically favor Clinton, whereas suburb turnout will favor Sanders.
/u/_supernovasky_
Click to expand...

 
Can one of you Hillary fans tell my why she strikes a chord with you?  I feel zero inspiration from this woman's campaign.  

Honestly, her campaign feels as hollow as the vomit I see on the Republican side:  Just a patchwork of buzz words and generic statements that appeal to those who don't like to think very hard.  

 
pantagrapher said:
This is just a silly gotcha. The most sensible reading here is that within the next five years, she'll commit to a universal lead abatement plan, not actually completely rid everything of lead by then.
Click to expand...
So within 5 years she will commit to removing lead? Is there some pro lead movement I haven't heard about? We have been scraping out asbestos for 40 years. 

Silly gotcha? I guess when the lady who blew the whistle on Flint asked her directly for help. Clinton responds with this ####. Oh and see the link to the Flint residence puking at Hillarys response. 

 
Captain Cranks said:
Can one of you Hillary fans tell my why she strikes a chord with you?  I feel zero inspiration from this woman's campaign.  

Honestly, her campaign feels as hollow as the vomit I see on the Republican side:  Just a patchwork of buzz words and generic statements that appeal to those who don't like to think very hard.  
Click to expand...
She's making one of the strongest status quo bids I can think of. :shrug:

I'm a Bernie supporter, but I understand why someone would be pro-Hillary.

 
Loan Sharks said:
Hillary proposes impossible plan to remove all lead from the country.  :rolleyes:

Whatever Flint wants to hear.
Click to expand...
The thing is, if you promise to remove all the lead from the water and you come up short, you still helped a lot of people and did something that benefits the country and its citizens. Compare that to what happens if you oh, say, promise to bomb ISIS out of existence but come up short, or promise to build a wall between the US and Mexico but come up short. 

There's a big difference between trying to do the impossible when more effort = clear benefit and trying the impossible when effort without total success = wasteful and/or counterproductive.

And by the way, this is what Clinton seemed to be saying, which is why she went with the vaguely worded "commit within five years to remove lead everywhere" rather than "we will have lead-free water across the united states within five years."

 
So lets lay this out.

Clinton will remove all lead in the country in 5 years

Cruz will remove the IRS

Rubio will remove Roe V Wade

Sanders will remove peoples money 

Trump will remove illegal immigrants 

Well that is just swell. 

 
hagmania said:
She's making one of the strongest status quo bids I can think of. :shrug:

I'm a Bernie supporter, but I understand why someone would be pro-Hillary.
Click to expand...
Reagan, March 1988

Approval rating: 50%

Jobless rate: 5.7%

Obama, now:

Approval rating: 50%

Jobless rate: 4.9%
Click to expand...
She's essentially running the Bush campaign from '88 with similar results so far. 

 
TobiasFunke said:
The thing is, if you promise to remove all the lead from the water and you come up short, you still helped a lot of people and did something that benefits the country and its citizens. Compare that to what happens if you oh, say, promise to bomb ISIS out of existence but come up short, or promise to build a wall between the US and Mexico but come up short. 

There's a big difference between trying to do the impossible when more effort = clear benefit and trying the impossible when effort without total success = wasteful and/or counterproductive.

And by the way, this is what Clinton seemed to be saying, which is why she went with the vaguely worded "commit within five years to remove lead everywhere" rather than "we will have lead-free water across the united states within five years."
Click to expand...
She didn't promise to remove all the lead. She promised that she will promise to remove lead in water,soil and homes sometime in the next five years, when she gets around to committing to it. Which was very comforting to the Flint residences who asked for help that sometime in the next 5 years they promise to start working on the problem. They were so comforted by her response that they threw up in their mouths a little bit. 

 
pantagrapher said:
This is just a silly gotcha. The most sensible reading here is that within the next five years, she'll commit to a universal lead abatement plan, not actually completely rid everything of lead by then.
Click to expand...
So, just to clarify, she'll commit to spending an estimated $1 trillion in infrastructure work across the United States? Only her version isn't currently coupled with a funding plan?

Fellow Bernie supporters, anyone else laughing about this?

Edit: Fortune article estimating pipe replacement at $1 trillion (also includes replacement needed for other reasons, but doesn't quantify how much is for other reasons)

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Loan Sharks said:
Yes which if you read the article is why Hills plan is impossible. Especially when you throw in her paint and soil removal. 
Click to expand...
I think she realizes this is a big political winner of an issue. A way to force republicans to support a large-scale national infrastructure bill under the guise of lead abatement. The GOP will have a tough task when it comes to explaining why they don't support a national lead-remediation plan. Usually they try to say this stuff should be left to the states, but in Michigan, you have a perfect case study of why that's a horrible idea that could hurt millions of people. Digging up old water lines and removing old paint doesn't just mean new water lines and new paint, it means new streets, new bridges, and new surrounding infrastructure. I hope she pushes this issue as far as she can, because the ancillary benefits could be massive. It sure sounds like she recognizes that.

 
Henry Ford said:
So, just to clarify, she'll commit to spending an estimated $1 trillion in infrastructure work across the United States? Only her version isn't currently coupled with a funding plan?

Fellow Bernie supporters, anyone else laughing about this?

Edit: Fortune article estimating pipe replacement at $1 trillion (also includes replacement needed for other reasons, but doesn't quantify how much is for other reasons)
Click to expand...
It's basically investment. Not much different than stimulus spending. It's not as if that money disappears into thin air.

 
Captain Cranks said:
Can one of you Hillary fans tell my why she strikes a chord with you?  I feel zero inspiration from this woman's campaign.  

Honestly, her campaign feels as hollow as the vomit I see on the Republican side:  Just a patchwork of buzz words and generic statements that appeal to those who don't like to think very hard.  
Click to expand...
I wouldn't say she strikes a chord with me, and I plan to vote Sanders in the primary because I think his message is important and deserves support. But I think it's silly to seek out "inspiration" from a presidential candidate anyway.  IMO that's not how the presidency works. 

This article about Obama's domestic policy achievements, which has been posted around here a few other times, makes the case that while the talking heads were yelling about winning political arguments and passing bills, he was quietly guiding important changes, often at the administrative level. I trust Hillary to continue most of that good work, because I generally agree with her on most policy issues and because she has extensive experience. 

As for foreign affairs, most of what we do there is reactive, not proactive, so experience is IMO more important that ideology. And Clinton clearly has the most experience of any person in the field, perhaps as much as any candidate in memory.  She's too hawkish for my tastes but only Sanders is to her left anyway (and maybe Trump depending on what day you ask him and what color the people he might kill are).

Bottom line:  I don't need to be inspired or have someone strike a chord with me.  I'm choosing someone to head our vast executive branch and make good informed decisions, not someone to convince me to finish my workout.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Henry Ford said:
So, just to clarify, she'll commit to spending an estimated $1 trillion in infrastructure work across the United States? Only her version isn't currently coupled with a funding plan?

Fellow Bernie supporters, anyone else laughing about this?

Edit: Fortune article estimating pipe replacement at $1 trillion (also includes replacement needed for other reasons, but doesn't quantify how much is for other reasons)
Click to expand...
What? I got a guy in Gentilly who'll do it for $500, tops. Only works Saturdays though.

 
pantagrapher said:
I think she realizes this is a big political winner of an issue. A way to force republicans to support a large-scale national infrastructure bill under the guise of lead abatement. The GOP will have a tough task when it comes to explaining why they don't support a national lead-remediation plan. Usually they try to say this stuff should be left to the states, but in Michigan, you have a perfect case study of why that's a horrible idea that could hurt millions of people. Digging up old water lines and removing old paint doesn't just mean new water lines and new paint, it means new streets, new bridges, and new surrounding infrastructure. I hope she pushes this issue as far as she can, because the ancillary benefits could be massive. It sure sounds like she recognizes that.
Click to expand...
I don't think Hillary is backing Trump into supporting a infrastructure bill since he is already on record as for massive public works. Maybe she is just copying Trump to cop some votes like when she spontaneously announced her free college tuition plan. 


 



Government should do public works & safety & little else


Common sense tell us that the two basic principles of governing should work anywhere they are applied. First: Get government out of activities it can’t do well. (A list of thing government doesn’t do well is a very long list.)

Second: Get government back in the business of providing for public convenience (transportation, public works) and safety (police and firefighters), and make sure it does so efficiently. Then judge its efforts by visible, definable results and fine-tune as needed.


Source: The America We Deserve, by Donald Trump, p. 60 Jul 2, 2000

 
Loan Sharks said:
I don't think Hillary is backing Trump into supporting a infrastructure bill since he is already on record as for massive public works. Maybe she is just copying Trump to cop some votes like when she spontaneously announced her free college tuition plan. 


 



Government should do public works & safety & little else


Common sense tell us that the two basic principles of governing should work anywhere they are applied. First: Get government out of activities it can’t do well. (A list of thing government doesn’t do well is a very long list.)

Second: Get government back in the business of providing for public convenience (transportation, public works) and safety (police and firefighters), and make sure it does so efficiently. Then judge its efforts by visible, definable results and fine-tune as needed.


Source: The America We Deserve, by Donald Trump, p. 60 Jul 2, 2000
Click to expand...
I'm talking about congress, not Trump.

 
Henry Ford said:
So, just to clarify, she'll commit to spending an estimated $1 trillion in infrastructure work across the United States? Only her version isn't currently coupled with a funding plan?

Fellow Bernie supporters, anyone else laughing about this?

Edit: Fortune article estimating pipe replacement at $1 trillion (also includes replacement needed for other reasons, but doesn't quantify how much is for other reasons)
Click to expand...
1HVD4Yd.png


;)

 
Has anyone looked at what Hillary has on her webpage with regard to health care?  She's all over the place.  I was under the impression (because it's her exact words from debates) that she wanted to "tweak" Obamacare.  She has everything from making small changes to full on "public option" (which would be a complete replacement of what's there now).  Lot's of promises on the page, but no details around how she plans on paying for it.  Has she talked about the funding part of her healthcare proposal?

https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/health-care/

 
jon_mx said:
I love how Hillary fanbots can completely ignore what Hillary said and just make up a plan they like? :lol:  
Click to expand...
It started by ignoring her actions and focusing on her words, but now they've graduated to ignoring her actions and her words.

 
TobiasFunke said:
She doesn't even explain how she'll fund some of her proposals!  This of course is in stark contrast to all the other presidential candidates, all of whom have provided detailed accounting of how they will fund their proposed policies.
Click to expand...
Particularly making our military great again!

 
TobiasFunke said:
She doesn't even explain how she'll fund some of her proposals!  This of course is in stark contrast to all the other presidential candidates, all of whom have provided detailed accounting of how they will fund their proposed policies.
Click to expand...
Bernie's pretty much set the bar of expectation.  If he can do it, she can :shrug:

 
The Commish said:
Has anyone looked at what Hillary has on her webpage with regard to health care?  She's all over the place.  I was under the impression (because it's her exact words from debates) that she wanted to "tweak" Obamacare.  She has everything from making small changes to full on "public option" (which would be a complete replacement of what's there now).  Lot's of promises on the page, but no details around how she plans on paying for it.  Has she talked about the funding part of her healthcare proposal?

https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/health-care/
Click to expand...
So, I'm guessing "no" on this one??

 
The Commish said:
Bernie's pretty much set the bar of expectation.  If he can do it, she can :shrug:
Click to expand...
Which is part of why I'm voting for him.  That said, there's very little difference between not explaining how you'll pay for your proposals and saying you'll pay for them with new taxes/closing tax loopholes.  If it was that easy to raise tax rates, impose new taxes and close loopholes it would have been done already to pay for an existing program.

 
Captain Cranks said:
Can one of you Hillary fans tell my why she strikes a chord with you?  I feel zero inspiration from this woman's campaign.  

Honestly, her campaign feels as hollow as the vomit I see on the Republican side:  Just a patchwork of buzz words and generic statements that appeal to those who don't like to think very hard.  
Click to expand...
I find her sexy as all get out. 

 
TobiasFunke said:
She doesn't even explain how she'll fund some of her proposals!  This of course is in stark contrast to all the other presidential candidates, all of whom have provided detailed accounting of how they will fund their proposed policies.
Click to expand...
Why bother funding something you have no intention of actually doing?

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

mr. furley
Long Island serial killer suspect in custody
Replies
34
Views
2K
Dezbelief
Dezbelief
krista4
In this thread I rank my favorite Beatles songs: 204-1.
138 139 140
Replies
7K
Views
258K
rockaction
rockaction
HellToupee
***Official*** Joe Biden 2016 Presidential Thread
Replies
35
Views
2K
That one guy
T

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 8 (members: 0, guests: 8)
Back
Top