Ranxerox Posted June 17, 2016 Report Share Posted June 17, 2016 As smoking guns go, it is kinda underwhelming. So, back in 2015 the DNC was already thinking Hillary Clinton would be the 2016 Democratic nominee. Well, back in 2015 everybody thought that Hillary would be the 2016 Democratic nominee, so why is that a surprise? They had a clear front runner and they started coordinating with that front runner early with an eye to the general election. How is that a scandal? Now show me some emails of the DNC doing something or plotting to do something against the Sanders' campaign and I will be shocked and outraged. However, since this was a full blown hack of the type that you would expect to uncover all the dirty secrets and it didn't find any evidence of actual misdoings against the Sanders campaign, that suggest that no such evidence exist to be found. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starlord Posted June 17, 2016 Report Share Posted June 17, 2016 Now the Democrats want a wall Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hermit Posted June 17, 2016 Report Share Posted June 17, 2016 Now the Democrats want a wall But will they get the GOP to pay for it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sinanju Posted June 17, 2016 Report Share Posted June 17, 2016 As smoking guns go, it is kinda underwhelming. So, back in 2015 the DNC was already thinking Hillary Clinton would be the 2016 Democratic nominee. Well, back in 2015 everybody thought that Hillary would be the 2016 Democratic nominee, so why is that a surprise? They had a clear front runner and they started coordinating with that front runner early with an eye to the general election. How is that a scandal? Now show me some emails of the DNC doing something or plotting to do something against the Sanders' campaign and I will be shocked and outraged. However, since this was a full blown hack of the type that you would expect to uncover all the dirty secrets and it didn't find any evidence of actual misdoings against the Sanders campaign, that suggest that no such evidence exist to be found. Yeah. I'm not willing to give Hilary or the DNC the slightest benefit of ANY doubt. But if the hackers had found some real evidence, we'd be seeing it already.Were the DNC Powers That Be pushing for Hilary and opposed to Bernie? Well, duh. Everyone could see that. But if they did anything underhanded, they were smart enough not to leave evidence on a computer where the hackers could reach it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Certified Posted June 17, 2016 Report Share Posted June 17, 2016 https://www.pastemagazine.com/articles/2016/06/forget-party-unity-the-new-dnc-email-leak-means-th.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megaplayboy Posted June 18, 2016 Report Share Posted June 18, 2016 http://www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/no-i-dont-dislike-the-new-ghostbusters-movie-because-i-hate-women-its-because-i-strongly-believe-in-hollywood-finance-reform Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enforcer84 Posted June 18, 2016 Report Share Posted June 18, 2016 Not with that avatar. No shirt, no shoes, no entrance. What about shirt and shoes, but no pants? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Badger Posted June 18, 2016 Report Share Posted June 18, 2016 What about shirt and shoes, but no pants? I figured you had tried that loophole before. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hermit Posted June 18, 2016 Report Share Posted June 18, 2016 Well, Elizabeth Warren is apparently on Clinton's short list for VP nom... IF they go that route, I'll feel a lot better about voting for her. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
st barbara Posted June 19, 2016 Report Share Posted June 19, 2016 I thought that Trump was a wealthy and successful business tycoon ? Why can't he pay for his campaign ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pattern Ghost Posted June 19, 2016 Report Share Posted June 19, 2016 He's still saying he'll self fund his campaign if nobody else will. I heard a soundbite to that effect while coming back from shopping for veggies earlier. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wcw43921 Posted June 19, 2016 Report Share Posted June 19, 2016 Die Roll Breaks A Tie In Oregon Election Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Liaden Posted June 19, 2016 Report Share Posted June 19, 2016 I thought that Trump was a wealthy and successful business tycoon ? Why can't he pay for his campaign ? I've read various highly contradictory estimates of Donald Trump's net worth, including from Trump himself. His self-valuation includes what he sees as the value of the "Trump brand," i.e. the money he gets for putting his name on something, which he assumes will make people want to buy it or invest in it. In any case, spending on a political campaign isn't like spending on a real estate deal. Trump can't anticipate a substantial direct financial return on his investment even if he wins the Presidency. Purely from a business standpoint, that's not sound financial practice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Certified Posted June 19, 2016 Report Share Posted June 19, 2016 Two researchers released a paper (not a study) examining whether primary election fraud that favored Hillary Clinton had occurred. WHAT'S TRUE: Two researchers (presumably graduate students) from Stanford University and Tilburg University co-authored a paper asserting they uncovered information suggesting widespread primary election fraud favoring Hillary Clinton had occurred across multiple states. http://www.snopes.com/stanford-study-proves-election-fraud-through-exit-poll-discrepancies/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ranxerox Posted June 19, 2016 Report Share Posted June 19, 2016 Two researchers released a paper (not a study) examining whether primary election fraud that favored Hillary Clinton had occurred. WHAT'S TRUE: Two researchers (presumably graduate students) from Stanford University and Tilburg University co-authored a paper asserting they uncovered information suggesting widespread primary election fraud favoring Hillary Clinton had occurred across multiple states. http://www.snopes.com/stanford-study-proves-election-fraud-through-exit-poll-discrepancies/ Ten of the the thirteen states classified as being without paper trails are southern states. Now I realize that "Former First Lady Of Arkansas Beats The Tar Out Of Vermont Socialist In Southern Contest" lacks something in the way of conspiracy theory draw, but it would be just as accurate of a name for the the paper. As for the exit poll data portion of the paper, it has noted by other articles that Sanders does much better on election day than he does in write in ballots. No doubt this conjures images for many Sanders supporters of Clinton staffers mailing in hundred of thousands or millions of fraudulent mail in ballots. However running an election fraud on that scale without being given away by your own workers would be neigh impossible, and it is not necessary to explain the discrepancy. Absentee ballots have long been known to be more popular among older voters than younger voters Like absentee ballots, Clinton's popularity also skews towards older voters. So Clinton's out performing in mail in ballots does not need some dark, difficult to hide conspiracy to explain. Grandma mailed in her ballot two weeks before the election and didn't talk to any exit pollsters while the kids went to the polls in person and did. Look, The only big surprise of the Democratic primary was Sanders' win in Wisconsin. All of Clinton's victories were in line with what pre-election polling indicated that they would be. None of Hillary's victories were considered upsets, I really don't know what if anything that I could say or show that would convince you that the election wasn't stolen by the Clinton campaign, but it wasn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Liaden Posted June 21, 2016 Report Share Posted June 21, 2016 20% of Donald Trump’s campaign spending goes to Trump businesses, according to his FEC filing. At least as surprising news from that filing, is the relatively paltry amount of funding Trump's campaign raised last month, compared to Hillary Clinton, and to past presidential candidates. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Certified Posted June 21, 2016 Report Share Posted June 21, 2016 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hermit Posted June 21, 2016 Report Share Posted June 21, 2016 Went and found the Politico article itself...which was not easy to find oddly Frankly, if I were Hillary.... and had just been told what to do so publicly by the very group that others had accused me of being practically owned by, I'd almost feel required to get Warren or someone like her Seriously, Clinton, if every there was a time to start singing "You don't own me" , now's the time. Otherwise, Trump is going to go to town about whose pocket you belong in and even those who hate Trump are going to wonder why they should get off their butts and vote for you. gewing 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iuz the Evil Posted June 22, 2016 Report Share Posted June 22, 2016 Wow. Clinton-Warren would be a big positive step in unifying the party after a contentious primary. I'm relatively comfortable with upsetting Wall Street in the process. Hermit and gewing 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
womble Posted June 22, 2016 Report Share Posted June 22, 2016 Is there no chance of Clinton-Sanders? What stage is the actual nomination process at? I remember Bernie saying he'd support Hillary's candidacy if she won the Dem nomination: has he conceded? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Badger Posted June 22, 2016 Report Share Posted June 22, 2016 Me, personally, I really, really, really, do not like Warren. But, I can see it being a solid Dem strategy. (and I'm not likely to vote anyway, remember) Note: I'm not going to get into it, as I would not be able to without taking a whack from the hammer of Simon, and very much deservedly so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Certified Posted June 22, 2016 Report Share Posted June 22, 2016 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon Posted June 22, 2016 Author Report Share Posted June 22, 2016 Are we attempting to circumvent the rules by posting videos instead of using your own words?Anything in links and/or videos that you link will be treated no differently than something that you wrote in an actual post. I'd suggest spending some time considering what you link to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megaplayboy Posted June 24, 2016 Report Share Posted June 24, 2016 The problem with the "throw the bums out" mentality is that voters keep replacing them with new bums. Perhaps it would be better to identify the direction of change and means of getting there, then voting accordingly? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
death tribble Posted June 24, 2016 Report Share Posted June 24, 2016 It may violate the rules of the thread but I have to ask. Trump is in Scotland at the moment. Can we on this side of the Atlantic do anything for Americans while he is here ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.