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!
The casinos were owned by a partnership, not a corporation, so the loss flowed through.
It appears the reports were slightly off - the Clintons were actually kidnapping Haitian children and using their bones to complete a second floor addition to the Clinton estate. The media never gets these things 100% correct.
I'm not sure about the specific allegation. What I have read before is that the Foundation hooked up one of Hillary's brothers with a big development project in Haiti, and also maybe one or two other Foundation contributors in the same fashion. However a lot of people don't understand this is the kind of work the Foundation has been doing for some time now. They are not a charity per se, they morphed into a essentially a PR firm which hooks up partners often with nation states and some foreign aid or NGO funding to create private development, albeit supposedly for the "greater good."
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/437883/hillarys-america-secret-history-democratic-party-dinesh-dsouza-clinton-foundation
I can tell you we had our own problems with 'hurricane proof trailers' on the Gulf coast.
For me the problem is the fact that Dineesh D'Souza is your source. He is as ignorant and shallow minded as Trump and he shares his penchant for over dramatization and an overblown sense of self. In short, D'Souza is a quack.
I really struggle to wrap my head around how any educated person is undecided about these candidates. It's baffling to me really. Hillary's been around for ages and Trump has been the 24 hour news cycle for the last 18 months. What additional information are people waiting for to be comfortable in making a decision? Why do I have the feeling that "undecided" this election cycle means "voting for Trump but don't want to admit it"
I know a couple of undecideds and their reasoning is the same: They don't like either major candidate and don't want to "waste" their vote on a third party so they are waiting to see which of the main two stinks less as we near the election. In both cases it's clear that they resent having to hold their nose to vote for Clinton so they are, or were, waiting to see if Trump could possibly be okay. In the end they will vote for Clinton.I really struggle to wrap my head around how any educated person is undecided about these candidates. It's baffling to me really. Hillary's been around for ages and Trump has been the 24 hour news cycle for the last 18 months. What additional information are people waiting for to be comfortable in making a decision? Why do I have the feeling that "undecided" this election cycle means "voting for Trump but don't want to admit it"
I really struggle to wrap my head around how any educated person is undecided about these candidates. It's baffling to me really. Hillary's been around for ages and Trump has been the 24 hour news cycle for the last 18 months. What additional information are people waiting for to be comfortable in making a decision? Why do I have the feeling that "undecided" this election cycle means "voting for Trump but don't want to admit it"
Agreed...that would be like saying all women should be believed even though....oh that's right, it doesn't matter...
I assume "undecided" is code for "far too lazy to get off the couch and vote, but currently in self-denial regarding that fact".I really struggle to wrap my head around how any educated person is undecided about these candidates. It's baffling to me really. Hillary's been around for ages and Trump has been the 24 hour news cycle for the last 18 months. What additional information are people waiting for to be comfortable in making a decision? Why do I have the feeling that "undecided" this election cycle means "voting for Trump but don't want to admit it"
Beats me.I really struggle to wrap my head around how any educated person is undecided about these candidates. It's baffling to me really. Hillary's been around for ages and Trump has been the 24 hour news cycle for the last 18 months. What additional information are people waiting for to be comfortable in making a decision? Why do I have the feeling that "undecided" this election cycle means "voting for Trump but don't want to admit it"
Well Hillary has gotten $260,000 from Wells Fargo. I'm trying to understand why they would back the money truck up for someone who is going to ' crack down' on them.
I think you're missing the point of that tweet there, GB. It's not that Clinton is actually going to "crack down," although she might. It's that the press and the public apply two different standards to the candidates. Clinton would get laughed out of the room and quite possibly out of the race if she ever tried to argue that taking Wells Fargo's money while planning to crack down on them was evidence of her brilliance.
Yeah, that I agree with. In general I could do without our national leader bragging about "smart" he thinks he is, regardless of the subject.
I can see how providing money to McDonalds to promote healthier choices seems strange when it appears to be in their best interest to do so, but it does appear to be making some impact:
Yeah, I'm not talking about the impact of it. I'm sure you and I would both rather see an apple in a kid's lunch than french fries. This is also obviously good marketing for McD's.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Colombe_Coffee_Roasters
- So... it sounds to me like the CF got together with a private company to develop the Haitian coffee sector.
I agree it's not the best use of funds. What's strange is that they gave the money to McDonalds with oversight from the Alliance for a Healthier Generation instead of to that charity instead.
Voting for another candidate isn't a rejection of Trump unless that candidate is Hillary?
It is, it's just not as effective of a rejection. A 45-40 Trump loss simply isn't as clear of a national rejection of his brand of ignorance and hatred as a 50-40 Trump loss. The former is a rout. The latter leaves open the possibility of a number of things, including two things I find very problematic: (1) Trump claiming the election was rigged and refusing to concede, which could lead his idiot followers to do God knows what; and (2) someone 4 or 8 or 12 years from now deciding that Trumpism could win a national election if its champion is someone slightly less moronic and detested and making it happen.
This specific sort of voter absolutely astonishes me. They've been convinced that voting someone other than D or R is a "wasted" vote and are still accepting of the "lesser of two evils" concept.I know a couple of undecideds and their reasoning is the same: They don't like either major candidate and don't want to "waste" their vote on a third party so they are waiting to see which of the main two stinks less as we near the election. In both cases it's clear that they resent having to hold their nose to vote for Clinton so they are, or were, waiting to see if Trump could possibly be okay. In the end they will vote for Clinton.I really struggle to wrap my head around how any educated person is undecided about these candidates. It's baffling to me really. Hillary's been around for ages and Trump has been the 24 hour news cycle for the last 18 months. What additional information are people waiting for to be comfortable in making a decision? Why do I have the feeling that "undecided" this election cycle means "voting for Trump but don't want to admit it"
Your continued refusal to accept the obvious rationality of this is absolutely astonishing to me.The Commish said:
I fully accept doing the same thing over and over is going to change anything. The two party system, as it is today is what it is. Doesn't mean it can't be changed, but one has to be willing to think in a manner different than what the two parties and their options want you to think. As long as one continues to buy into what the parties are selling, it's not going to change. This is why, especially on a local level, I encourage people to really pay attention. That's where the change happens. I see it here around me, which is encouraging. Bernie's impact here has given people running for office around here the courage to run for office because they see people are tired of the crappy choices election after election.
It will take a lot more than this instance to become a tipping point. My argument being based on all the other illegitimate acts government has been doing that haven't been tipping points either. I think the people are growing more and more heated about these instances, and it will eventually boil over... but not yet. And how it boils over is anyone's guess. We celebrate a boiling over every July 4th.
The thing I find astonishing is that you refuse to acknowledge that the danger of Trumpism is well beyond whatever "problem" you think you're articulating here.
“Can’t we just drone this guy?” Clinton openly inquired, offering a simple remedy to silence Assange and smother Wikileaks via a planned military drone strike, according to State Department sources. The statement drew laughter from the room which quickly died off when the Secretary kept talking in a terse manner, sources said. Clinton said Assange, after all, was a relatively soft target, “walking around” freely and thumbing his nose without any fear of reprisals from the United States. Clinton was very upset about Assange’s previous releases.
I don't necessarily know if I'm ready to agree, but this is probably the best and most well-reasoned argument for the 'lesser of two evils' vote that I've heard so far.
No....I don't. This "equally the same" shtick has gotten old. I don't compare them to each other. There's no point in doing that. If neither is close to measuring up to the standard set on their own merits, why would I waste my time comparing them to see which is worse? When you have to candidates of this "quality", maybe it's time to step back and wonder how the #### we got here in the first place, because understanding THAT is far more important than worrying about who's less crappy IMO. That's where I'm at right now.
I took a second look at this - I think WL or TruePundit needs to provide a source document. It seems like they are providing analysis of State Department cables or referring to some 'source' inside State yet they do not link a document or indicate the nature of the source.
This is where I am too. #### I'm so depressed over this election. As a country we're so lost.
It's the best we can do sure....the problem is it still not very good. I have no doubt that even if Trump is rejected at 50-40, the politicians in Washington will pin it all on Trump as if HE is the problem and the system that allowed him to rise is absolved. To TF and others here pay closer attention to politics than the average voter, it will be a sign of repudiation. That's how they've defined it and that's fine. I think it'll be lost on most and chalked up to a "ha ha...remember that time Trump ran for President?"
Eh, I kind of doubt this. Say what you will about Washington and the political establishment, but most of them aren't stupid by any stretch. They are smart enough to know that Trump is merely a symptom, and not the actual disease. No idea what they do moving forward, but both Trump and to a lesser extent Bernie have to have made the establishment types pretty uncomfortable this cycle. They'll respond, if for no other reason than to prevent this from happening again.
I'd say rejecting racism, xenophobia, islamophobia, repression of free speech, rejection of civil rights, and stunning ignorance from an aspiring war criminal who poses a unique threat to an otherwise great nation is far more important than reaching a deep understanding of systemic flaws in that great nation's political process. So we're gonna have to agree to disagree there.
