Hillary's Campaign - Hanging on a ...

Akrasia · 04-11-2016 09:19AM

Wibbs wrote: »

I have to be honest and I never thought I'd say this, but I hope Trump wins. If he does he'll be able to do little if anything once in the oval office, whereas Clinton is so connected within Washington politics and beyond she could do some real damage.

On one side, I kinda think like this, but on the other side, at least Clinton says she believes in Climate Change. This is the biggest issue facing our planet, and Trump would mean a total deadlock on any meaningful action and will probably undo some of the progress that has been made.

Clinton is more pragmatic and definitely won't go far enough, but probably won't go backwards.

Wibbs · 04-11-2016 09:44AM

Akrasia wrote: »

On one side, I kinda think like this, but on the other side, at least Clinton says she believes in Climate Change.

She might believe it, but she'll do actually very little about it, nor will any other president(or block vote in their parliament), not until reducing the causes of climate change becomes more profitable than not. There are far too many lobbyists for the climate changers and runaway consumerist society for any real change at the moment.

For me the real litmus test is that we and Americans are even having a debate over a candidate where the other candidate is Donald effing Trump. That's how borderline Clinton is.

osarusan · 04-11-2016 09:52AM

I think they'd both be pretty poor presidents, but one difference for me is that Clinton will be poor in the way that poor presidents have always been poor. She understand the role and its affordances and limitations.

With Trump, I genuinely think he doesn't really know much about politics and what being president entails, and what powers he would and wouldn't have. It's easy to say that he would be held in check by advisors and the like, but there hasn't been any evidence of that so far.

Either way, I don't think that he will win - I remember the polls tightening 4 years ago but Obama won easily in the end. I think the media will tell us it's in the balance so we'll keep watching.

Hank Scorpio · 04-11-2016 10:07AM

https://wikileaks.org/gifiles/docs/12/1223066_re-get-ready-for-chicago-hot-dog-friday-.html

Have a look around the internet for what hot dogs is slang for. Or see what Wikileaks re-tweeted earlier. https://twitter.com/wikileaks?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=12zVlaZyX3Q

Now before you shoot him down, have a look at his credentials here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Pieczenik

The wikileak emails released today link the Clinton foundation directly with Laura Silsby, a child sex trafficker.

This is all over the internet atm. I'm not a conspiracy theorist at all and would never buy into something so scandalous but there's so much coming out it's hard to not be at least skeptical. What's being said is the NYPD obtained the emails from Weiner and threatened to expose everything unless the FBI came forward and reopened the investigation, which would explain the timing of everything.

Maybe I'm sleep deprived but go look around reddit and see for yourself. I still lean of the sign of it's just speculation but's it's very hard to ignore so much information, Bill Clinton was on the lolita express many times also.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/05/13/flight-logs-show-bill-clinton-flew-on-sex-offenders-jet-much-more-than-previously-known.html

ohnonotgmail · 04-11-2016 10:11AM

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

https://wikileaks.org/gifiles/docs/12/1223066_re-get-ready-for-chicago-hot-dog-friday-.html

Have a look around the internet for what hot dogs is slang for. Or see what Wikileaks re-tweeted earlier. https://twitter.com/wikileaks?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=12zVlaZyX3Q

Now before you shoot him down, have a look at his credentials here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Pieczenik

The wikileak emails released today link the Clinton foundation directly with Laura Silsby, a child sex trafficker.

This is all over the internet atm. I'm not a conspiracy theorist at all and would never buy into something so scandalous but there's so much coming out it's hard to not be at least skeptical. What's being said is the NYPD obtained the emails from Weiner and threatened to expose everything unless the FBI came forward and reopened the investigation, which would explain the timing of everything.

Maybe I'm sleep deprived but go look around reddit and see for yourself, everything is coming out.

I'm sure she is linked to a lot of people just by the nature of who she is. some of those have probably committed crimes due to the law of averages if nothing else. It is guilt by association and nothing else.

Hank Scorpio · 04-11-2016 10:22AM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

I'm sure she is linked to a lot of people just by the nature of who she is. some of those have probably committed crimes due to the law of averages if nothing else. It is guilt by association and nothing else.

I updated my post, check the foxnews link. It's an awful lot of coincidences. Since that Fox story broke it's been proven Weiner was on the plane multiple times. I stand by what you say because the notion is just so ridiculous to comprehend. It's impossible to imagine something like this could be true.

MeatTwoVeg · 04-11-2016 10:23AM

The election isn't 'in the balance', it's not even close. Hillary has well over 280 electoral votes in the bag.
It's suiting the media to push this 'too close to call' message, but the reality is very different. Hillary's got all the big States, I even expect her to win Florida, though that's quite close.

claiomh solais · 04-11-2016 10:34AM

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

I updated my post, check the foxnews link. It's an awful lot of coincidences. Since that Fox story broke it's been proven Weiner was on the plane multiple times. I stand by what you say because the notion is just so ridiculous to comprehend. It's impossible to imagine something like this could be true.

To be fair Ireland felt the same way when people accused the highest power of the land (the Church) of being infiltrated with pedophile rings. Too ridiculous to be true.

People in the UK felt it was too ridiculous to comprehend when they found out about the pedophile rings in Westminster/BBC. Plus when people called out about the pedo gangs in Rotherham the media ignored it for years.

I'm not saying this Clinton Foundation stuff is true. I'm just saying I wouldn't be surprised if it was. Pedophiles gravitate to power structures in every nation - so they can get away with it.

Akrasia · 04-11-2016 10:44AM

MeatTwoVeg wrote: »

The election isn't 'in the balance', it's not even close. Hillary has well over 280 electoral votes in the bag.
It's suiting the media to push this 'too close to call' message, but the reality is very different. Hillary's got all the big States, I even expect her to win Florida, though that's quite close.

538 has it about 65% likely that Hillary will win. It's going to be close but I still think Clinton will win, if only due to her better ground game. Clinton will have been bussing her voters to the booths and and giving them everything they need to do postal or early voting.
Trump's ground campaign is the weakest of any presidential candidate in decades. Clinton has armies of volunteers, and paid staff. Trump may have volunteers, but his paid staff are hardly going to be motivated to work when Trump is refusing to pay his own pollsters

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/world/trump-refusing-to-pay-766k-bill-from-campaign-aide-his-pollster-election-commission-records-show

A lot of his paid staff will be justifiably worried that they're not gonna get paid

ohnonotgmail · 04-11-2016 10:51AM

Akrasia wrote: »

538 has it about 65% likely that Hillary will win. It's going to be close but I still think Clinton will win, if only due to her better ground game. Clinton will have been bussing her voters to the booths and and giving them everything they need to do postal or early voting.
Trump's ground campaign is the weakest of any presidential candidate in decades. Clinton has armies of volunteers, and paid staff. Trump may have volunteers, but his paid staff are hardly going to be motivated to work when Trump is refusing to pay his own pollsters

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/world/trump-refusing-to-pay-766k-bill-from-campaign-aide-his-pollster-election-commission-records-show

A lot of his paid staff will be justifiably worried that they're not gonna get paid

with trumps history of doing this i'm surprised the guy thought he would get paid.

uncle_sam_ie · 04-11-2016 10:58AM

Potatoeman wrote: »

Whats the point of public opinion polls when there are only 538 electors.

This could happen too.

"What happens if no presidential candidate gets 270 Electoral votes?

If no candidate receives a majority of Electoral votes, the House of Representatives elects the President from the 3 Presidential candidates who received the most Electoral votes. Each state delegation has one vote. The Senate would elect the Vice President from the 2 Vice Presidential candidates with the most Electoral votes. Each Senator would cast one vote for Vice President. If the House of Representatives fails to elect a President by Inauguration Day, the Vice-President Elect serves as acting President until the deadlock is resolved in the House."

https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/faq.html#no270

ohnonotgmail · 04-11-2016 11:09AM

uncle_sam_ie wrote: »

This could happen too.

"What happens if no presidential candidate gets 270 Electoral votes?

If no candidate receives a majority of Electoral votes, the House of Representatives elects the President from the 3 Presidential candidates who received the most Electoral votes. Each state delegation has one vote. The Senate would elect the Vice President from the 2 Vice Presidential candidates with the most Electoral votes. Each Senator would cast one vote for Vice President. If the House of Representatives fails to elect a President by Inauguration Day, the Vice-President Elect serves as acting President until the deadlock is resolved in the House."

https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/faq.html#no270

that can only happen if somebody other than clinton or trump wins a state. Not something i would bet money on.

osarusan · 04-11-2016 01:51PM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

that can only happen if somebody other than clinton or trump wins a state. Not something i would bet money on.

Or that the electoral college 'electors' change their pledge and become 'faithless electors' - they vote for a different candidate, or not vote at all.

ohnonotgmail · 04-11-2016 01:57PM

osarusan wrote: »

Or that the electoral college 'electors' change their pledge and become 'faithless electors' - they vote for a different candidate, or not vote at all.

again, not something i would bet money on happening. There have been faithless electors but never enough in recent times to create a situation where no candidate gets 280 votes.

Hande hoche! · 04-11-2016 02:03PM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

that can only happen if somebody other than clinton or trump wins a state. Not something i would bet money on.

That's true. McMullin seems to have stalled.

osarusan · 04-11-2016 02:04PM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

again, not something i would bet money on happening. There have been faithless electors but never enough in recent times to create a situation where no candidate gets 280 votes.

Sure, I agree, just highlighting a technical possibility.

04-11-2016 02:20PM

Edit:

I actually love CollegeHumour's take on Trump -

Walter H Price · 04-11-2016 04:57PM

Wibbs wrote: »

I have to be honest and I never thought I'd say this, but I hope Trump wins. If he does he'll be able to do little if anything once in the oval office, whereas Clinton is so connected within Washington politics and beyond she could do some real damage.

I have said this time and again , Clinton is the worst excess of the sterotypical corupt lying power hungry estalishment politican , whats more frigtening about her is she has the DNC sewn up , despite being an awful candidate under criminal investigation she has the full support of the democratic party. The wikileaks realses showing how the party activly worked against saunders hilights this further.

If Trump wins he's a lame duck from day 1 he has little support from the Republican national congress , Paul Ryan and other leading repulican's cant stand him , he will be blocked by the house and senate all over the place , a Trump presidency will be all bark and no bite. Clinton is the polar opposite she will say the PC thing spout the liberal agenda all day long and increase tensions with russia more and more brininging us closer to a 3rd world war or a return to cold war relations between the superpowers.

Iwasfrozen · 04-11-2016 06:17PM

Walter H Price wrote: »

I have said this time and again , Clinton is the worst excess of the sterotypical corupt lying power hungry estalishment politican , whats more frigtening about her is she has the DNC sewn up , despite being an awful candidate under criminal investigation she has the full support of the democratic party. The wikileaks realses showing how the party activly worked against saunders hilights this further.

If Trump wins he's a lame duck from day 1 he has little support from the Republican national congress , Paul Ryan and other leading repulican's cant stand him , he will be blocked by the house and senate all over the place , a Trump presidency will be all bark and no bite. Clinton is the polar opposite she will say the PC thing spout the liberal agenda all day long and increase tensions with russia more and more brininging us closer to a 3rd world war or a return to cold war relations between the superpowers.

This is an important point. There is only one superpower.

It's important not to give Russia more status than it deserves or it will seem like a more threatening foe than it is.

Russia's economy is only marginally greater than Australia's. They are no threat to the US and the US has little to fear from penalizing Russian aggression.

PoorAuldDivil · 04-11-2016 06:18PM

Walter H Price wrote: »

Clinton is the polar opposite she will say the PC thing spout the liberal agenda all day long and increase tensions with russia more and more brininging us closer to a 3rd world war or a return to cold war relations between the superpowers.

This is actually incredibly worrying. Your average 'liberal' seems so pent up and hot-and-bothered about perceived misogyny and racism, imaginary homophobia (speaking as a gay man, I have never seem any evidence Trump is homophobic.) that they sleep-walk in the real possibility of a major war (if not WW3). If a massive engagement breaks out, rubbish like Trump ranting about women's arses, cat-calling or the ever evil "WHITE MALE" will mean nothing.

b_mac2 · 04-11-2016 06:22PM

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

This is an important point. There is only one superpower.

It's important not to give Russia more status than it deserves or it will seem like a more threatening foe than it is.

Russia's economy is only marginally greater than Australia's. They are no threat to the US and the US has little to fear from penalizing Russian aggression.

Are you talking solely about economics here?

Iwasfrozen · 04-11-2016 06:23PM

b_mac2 wrote: »

Are you talking solely about economics here?

Since economics win wars, yes.

Hillary's Campaign - Hanging on a ...

Comments