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 (44 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.
 In two emails, on Aug. 11 and Aug. 14, Woodhouse urged Republicans serving on county election boards to follow the "party line" on curtailing the early voting period.

    "Many of our folks are angry and opposed to Sunday voting," he wrote. “Six days of voting in one week is enough. Period.” Keeping polling sites open for the full 17-day early voting period "may be wasteful and unnecessary," he added.

    Woodhouse's emails were subsequently published by local media, but he was not alone in lobbying to limit voting hours, the Reuters review of public records shows. The review counted similar emails from at least four other Republican Party officials to election boards, each of which is composed of two Republicans and one Democrat.

    The same day that Woodhouse sent his Aug. 11 email, Elaine Hewitt, a member of the Rowan County Republican Executive Committee, sent the county elections board two proposed schedules for early voting, both of which included just one site for the first four days and no sites on Sundays.

    "With all of the opportunities to vote by mail, early in person Monday - Saturday, and on Election Day, there is no justification for requiring election workers to work on Sundays," she wrote.

 
Opie said:
I live in NM and I supervise approx 250 employees.  Being in NM I would say that approx 75% of those employees are "Latino" of "Hispanic" and 75% of those are male..

During the Obama elections, I would safely say that just about everyone I supervise were for Obama.  If anyone in the lounge spoke against Obama, they were chastised and shut up.

THIS YEAR it is exactly the same...except they are in favor of Trump.  These "Latino" employees absolutely hate Hillary  

Believe it not, people of the "Hispanic" persuasion put a huge priority on truth and HONESTY.  They expect it from their family members and especially from their children.  They look at Hillary as the one person that they do not want their daughters to emulate.

Oh...and don't tell me that I don't know what I'm talking about.  I grew up in NM.  I know and am friends with many more Hispanics than any other people, and I am married to one.
Yea, so what?  If you lean right, a white male, conservative, or republican you are racist.   Stick that in your white robe.

 
People should not lose their right to vote simply because they committed a felony. Especially after they have paid their dues to society.
list of states that ban felons from voting

10 states will ban felons from voting permanently, and 20 more ban felons from voting until they finish probation. 15 of those states are southern Republican-leaning states with higher percentages of minorities in the population.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006 said:
Mr. Ham said:
New Podesta email.  Reminding Hillary not to send top secret Intel on insecure channel.

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/43648


Unbelievable.

The political advisor is reminding the SOS what is not appropriate for emailing.


Yet another, 2008 during the transition:

I was struck by the memo partly because it was first I had heard of it but much more because it was a sensitive doc bumping around on public email addresses. There is a very real threat to the security of our documents (particularly sensitive ones like the one you worked up), and we need to protect them by at least encrypting them.
Hey, John, I know I'm like a broken record on this, but I think we should arrange a briefing on the cyber threat for all associated with your effort. We have a real security threat on our stuff here. I would gladly work up something with our techie. We've developed a lot of expertise in this, unfortunately. DM
- Denis McDonough, President Obama's first chief of staff.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
What if you are struggling to vote for Hillary because of a lot of other things outside the emails?  Then what?
Then you're putting too much weight on her speeches and the appearance (not proven) of corruption over Clinton Foundation donations.  IMO a truly corrupt person would try to hide their corruption a little better.

 
With the states that 538 is projecting - albeit many are very slight leans - the Electoral College is 273 - 265

Based on 538 - Clinton is New Hampshire away from not getting to 270.  And if she loses New Hampshire, she probably loses one more Electoral vote from Maine splitting 3-1 (538 does not make the distinction)


Good thing she doesn't need those to win.
She may not need them, but that makes her path to victory uncomfortably close...

 
Then you're putting too much weight on her speeches and the appearance (not proven) of corruption over Clinton Foundation donations.  IMO a truly corrupt person would try to hide their corruption a little better.
Why hide it if the the only entites that could stop you (the DOJ and the POTUS) are part of the corrupt system?

Why worry when the person who would prosecute you  would meet secretly with your husband and is promised that the corruption will continue?

Even when the corruption is proven, exactly WHO will convene a Grand Jury?

And don't think for one second that she didn't TRY to hide it.  The private server was set up for the sole reason of skirting the FOIA.  

And it may have worked if it weren't for the Benghazi Hearings.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
What if you are struggling to vote for Hillary because of a lot of other things outside the emails?  Then what?
I don't know, there are legitimate reasons to struggle to vote for her but the other option is a threat to the democracy of your country and global security, so it really does seem like a no brainer to me. 

 
What if you are struggling to vote for Hillary because of a lot of other things outside the emails?  Then what?
Then you're putting too much weight on her speeches and the appearance (not proven) of corruption over Clinton Foundation donations.  IMO a truly corrupt person would try to hide their corruption a little better.
1.  Not sure I've ever called her corrupt.

2.  Certainly never read or listened to any of her speeches (assuming you are talking about Wall Street speeches here)

3.  My issues with the Clinton foundation are different than a lot.  I find it disgusting that they take money from the very kinds of people they are fighting against with respect to children and women's rights.....none of that is specific to Hillary herself though.

Anything else?

 
IK....you looked at this  Evan McMullin cat?  Trying to get opinions and info...any thoughts?
Here you go - https://www.evanmcmullin.com/issues

He's too conservative for me personally.  Abortion and defunding abortion programs (I'm assuming he means PP), healthcare are certainly things I don't agree with, though I don't mind strengthening Medicaid.  His "religious freedom" position is vague....I think we all agree that religious freedom is a good thing, but I disagree with most or all of the "religious freedom" laws passed in state legislatures over the years.  Seems like he wants to expand military spending, which I disagree with.  He's mum on other national security issues that are important to me.

I like his policy on immigration, refreshing to see a conservative that doesn't want to deport a bunch of people.  Trade policies sound alright to me.

I won't vote for him, I'll be voting Gary Johnson, but I find McMullin to be more respectable than both Trump and Clinton, to be honest.

 
IK....you looked at this  Evan McMullin cat?  Trying to get opinions and info...any thoughts?
Here you go - https://www.evanmcmullin.com/issues

He's too conservative for me personally.  Abortion and defunding abortion programs (I'm assuming he means PP), healthcare are certainly things I don't agree with, though I don't mind strengthening Medicaid.  His "religious freedom" position is vague....I think we all agree that religious freedom is a good thing, but I disagree with most or all of the "religious freedom" laws passed in state legislatures over the years.  Seems like he wants to expand military spending, which I disagree with.  He's mum on other national security issues that are important to me.

I like his policy on immigration, refreshing to see a conservative that doesn't want to deport a bunch of people.  Trade policies sound alright to me.

I won't vote for him, I'll be voting Gary Johnson, but I find McMullin to be more respectable than both Trump and Clinton, to be honest.
In a way there is a bit of a parallel election going on between McMullin, Johnson and Stein. All good people. Stein should be a stand-in for Sanders but unfortunately she is a legit whacko-bird loon. I think Indies can go in and vote their conscious for Johnson or McMullin and feel good about things coming out of the booth, these are good decent people with experience and mainstream ideas.

 
I don't know, there are legitimate reasons to struggle to vote for her but the other option is a threat to the democracy of your country and global security, so it really does seem like a no brainer to me. 
I do have multiple other options where the bold isn't true...that's not unique to Clinton.  She may not be a threat to "global security" but she certainly has been to national security.  If this is where you draw the line we have other options at our disposal that threaten our democracy and global security far less than Hillary or Trump.

 
 


- IMO not a great sign for Hillary, they shouldn't have to do this in PA.
PA is a lot closer than the polls.  Plus the SEPTA strike.  And really, PA is the key state for Trump.  It is difficult for him to win without it -- and it is ripe.  Also, the senate race here is a big deal as well and very close.

 
If anyone wants to give me **** about Johnson I have a serious question about what is more foolish, not knowing where/what Aleppo is vs Hillary constantly advocating for a "No Fly Zone" in Russian occupied territory where they already have a No-Fly Zone.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top