Law School Discussion

Off-Topic Area => Politics and Law-Related News => Topic started by: cinnamon synonym on June 19, 2015, 09:25:33 PM

Title: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on June 19, 2015, 09:25:33 PM
Who will replace Barack Obama? 
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on June 19, 2015, 11:09:14 PM
Donald Chump
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on June 20, 2015, 07:10:59 AM
The obvious answer is Hillary Clinton. If I was to bet. Because she will win the Democratic nomination, whereas the GOP side is still unsettled. And this far out, the Dem. nominee looks to be a slight favorite. Of course, events happen.

On the GOP side? I'd have to say Rubio or Walker. I can't imagine another Bush managing to win, and he's not a good campaigner, and his immigration position will kill him in the primaries. That said, he'll have the money and the backing of the party establishment, and that's all his brother needed in 2000.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Miami88 on June 20, 2015, 07:27:40 AM
Looking at it from an unbiased perspective - my guess is Clinton v. Bush.

Rubio is a strong contender, but is still too green. Obama was green, but had the charisma and smarts to win debates. Clinton would likely annihilate Rubio in debates. Rand Paul is an interesting candidate, but unlikely to garner enough support from the conservative base. Opposite is true for Sanders... interesting candidate, but unlikely to garner enough support from the liberal base.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on June 20, 2015, 03:39:56 PM
There is a nearly 100% chance Hilary will win her local nomination. I don't think Bush is such a lock though. Republicans could go in any direction right now. They expected her to win the last time Obama beat her in the primary (thus the Palin fiasco)
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on June 23, 2015, 01:56:34 PM
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that 2016 will be a little less predictable than 2008 or 2012. In 2008 the Republicans were doomed. Following the Iraq War and the economic collapse they were going to lose almost regardless of who the Democrats ran.

By 2012, some of Obama's lustre had worn off but he was still relatively popular. The combination of higher than usual minority/young turnout and Romney's general lack of appeal allowed him to squeak out a victory.

In 2016 the conventional wisdom is that demographic trends favor Hillary Clinton. I generally agree, but certain caveats apply.

First, minority and youth turnout will almost certainly be lower simply because Obama isn't running. This may be mitigated by higher than average female turnout, however.

Second, the last few years have not gone too well for Obama. This could result in a rejection of Democratic policies by swing voters. Registered Democrats and registered Republicans tend to vote along party lines no matter the candidate. But in states like Ohio, Colorado, Florida, etc., independent voters will make the decision. If the country is still puttering along economically, they will blame the Democrats.

Last, there is the issue of Hillary herself. She has any ardent supporters, but she also has many detractors. Among independent voters in swing states, she polls badly. Obama polled fairly well among these voters.

The Wildcard
If the Republicans nominate a nut (Ted Cruz/Rand Paul, etc), or can't control the dumber members of the party who make racist/sexist/xenophobic comments, then they'll lose regardless. I have a feeling, however, that they've already begun to reign that stuff in. The about-face by the Republicans in SC over the Confederate flag may be a sign of this. 

Summation
Clinton has an electoral vote edge going into the election, and will likely win. However, it will be closer (IMHO) than the last few elections.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on June 23, 2015, 10:41:17 PM
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that 2016 will be a little less predictable than 2008 or 2012. In 2008 the Republicans were doomed. Following the Iraq War and the economic collapse they were going to lose almost regardless of who the Democrats ran.

By 2012, some of Obama's lustre had worn off but he was still relatively popular. The combination of higher than usual minority/young turnout and Romney's general lack of appeal allowed him to squeak out a victory.

In 2016 the conventional wisdom is that demographic trends favor Hillary Clinton. I generally agree, but certain caveats apply.

First, minority and youth turnout will almost certainly be lower simply because Obama isn't running. This may be mitigated by higher than average female turnout, however.

Second, the last few years have not gone too well for Obama. This could result in a rejection of Democratic policies by swing voters. Registered Democrats and registered Republicans tend to vote along party lines no matter the candidate. But in states like Ohio, Colorado, Florida, etc., independent voters will make the decision. If the country is still puttering along economically, they will blame the Democrats.

Last, there is the issue of Hillary herself. She has any ardent supporters, but she also has many detractors. Among independent voters in swing states, she polls badly. Obama polled fairly well among these voters.

The Wildcard
If the Republicans nominate a nut (Ted Cruz/Rand Paul, etc), or can't control the dumber members of the party who make racist/sexist/xenophobic comments, then they'll lose regardless. I have a feeling, however, that they've already begun to reign that stuff in. The about-face by the Republicans in SC over the Confederate flag may be a sign of this. 

Summation
Clinton has an electoral vote edge going into the election, and will likely win. However, it will be closer (IMHO) than the last few elections.
I agree with SOME of what you said, and I agree that they would have lost to the idea of "but we've never had a (insert anything, even a dog on a skateboard with sunglasses and a Hawaiian shirt here-I'd vote for it) And now that we've had the token X, we'll like sheep vote for Token Y too. But I honestly think if it had been a white male dem like Kerry he'd have lost. It's easy to get deep into ones own party and think "EVERYONE" thinks a certain way......but they don't. Never have, never will. But EVERYONE is guilty of it.

Honestly people are sheep. Blacks got angry when "tricked" into voting for a white guy remember? http://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2013/11/11/pkg-white-politican-implies-black-fliers.khou

Sheep pretend not to be sheep, but get angry if they find out they voted on THE ISSUES alone..........silly f-ing sheep.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on June 25, 2015, 12:48:15 PM
I'm fairly active in Democratic politics (worked on a few campaigns, etc), and I can honestly say that the prevailing attitude seems to be "Let's hold our nose and vote for Hillary." Not exactly a ringing endorsement.

She simply does not generate the kind of excitement that Obama did, and I suspect that will result in lower turnout.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on June 25, 2015, 05:23:12 PM
I'm fairly active in Democratic politics (worked on a few campaigns, etc), and I can honestly say that the prevailing attitude seems to be "Let's hold our nose and vote for Hillary." Not exactly a ringing endorsement.

She simply does not generate the kind of excitement that Obama did, and I suspect that will result in lower turnout.

still better than how Republicans were with Romney. That was a funeral.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on June 27, 2015, 11:13:41 PM
I think something interesting is going on with party fragmentation. 
As an independent this is going to be fun to watch. Swing states of course will be the ultimate obvious key and the primary voting states could lend momentum to any one candidate but I think outcomes will be static and two way three way ties on the republican side which will add a whimsy aspect-- thus the clown car moniker.

The major quirk on the democrats side is the fact that Clinton has many hoops to jump through if she wants to win because she needs ALL the souls at the polls -- has to have Obama turnouts if she is going to win the general.  She will not turn voters.  On the republican side if Paul can coalesce a majority of independents he could turn votes.  A friend of mine who is anti war but independent only recently started taking Paul seriously.  So, conviction is key if independents are to be swayed.

Clinton has oversaturation of familiarity while Paul is under recognized.

clinton is polarizing while Paul is less known but not unknown.  These are their major flaws.

The clinton campaign has the toughest battle because while the money is there her surreptitious, furtive behavior with regard to a private email server create daily visceral baggage compounded by her comments while standing over four coffins and grieving loved ones where she blames a video for their deaths lends an aura of suspended apprehension for the next shoe to drop.  So, whispers of corruption, secrecy and callousness erode away at the enthusiastic voter pool.

The fragmentation is within the Democratic Party and "dueling progressive agendas"  and in the Republican Party between civil libertarianism and establishment conservatism.

One thing is for sure.  I would not want to be a democrat hedging my bet with Hillary.  And, democrats are never enthusiastic about getting stale bread elected just regard Michael Dukakis and John Kerry.



Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on June 27, 2015, 11:20:08 PM
Looking at it from an unbiased perspective - my guess is Clinton v. Bush.

Rubio is a strong contender, but is still too green. Obama was green, but had the charisma and smarts to win debates. Clinton would likely annihilate Rubio in debates. Rand Paul is an interesting candidate, but unlikely to garner enough support from the conservative base. Opposite is true for Sanders... interesting candidate, but unlikely to garner enough support from the liberal base.



Why would you think that sanders won't get the liberal base?  I think that it is the establishment democrats he needs to convince.  Sanders will probably win the New Hampshire primary.

And I would ask you /as I ask everyone\ what if clinton ends up with serious legal issues because of her foundation, or her email situation, her poll numbers continue to tank and she has to suspend her campaign?  After all it is not inconceivable.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on June 28, 2015, 12:12:55 PM
The fragmentation is within the Democratic Party and "dueling progressive agendas"  and in the Republican Party between civil libertarianism and establishment conservatism.

I essentially agree about the basis of the Democratic split, but I think the Republican split I far more damaging to their overall chances.

The Republican split is at least a three way between establishments (Bush), libertarians (Paul), and religious conservatives (Huckabee, Santorum, etc).

 I would argue that at this point the Republicans are in a real bind, a Catch-22. Candidates can't win the nomination or the general election without the evangelicals stepping up and voting, but they're doomed with independents if they appear too evangelical themselves.

The Republicans have allowed this far right element of the party to wield too much influence for too long, and now it's biting them on the a$$.

Even though I'm a Democrat, I hope they figure it out and find a way to be nationally competitive. I don't want there to be one party rule for the next few decades. Competition is good for political parties, it helps minimize corruption. California is a one party state, and look where it got us.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on June 29, 2015, 12:36:27 AM
With gay marriage now legal on the fed level and republicans on the state level trying to find ways to block it (or at least slow it down somehow) I have given up all hope for them to win. Plus the hole confederate flag deal (ironic how that has become a NON democrat supported thing out of the blue....what whateves) plus immigration as usual. Gays and every race and gender that isn't anglo saxon Christian male.................its game over man. Forget the women and children, push them overboard and get to the lifeboats........THIS BEEOTCH IS GOING DOWN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  :o
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on June 29, 2015, 09:55:56 AM
There is an element of the Republican party that would rather lose on principle than win on compromise. If they decide to make 2016 about gay marriage and abortion, they will lose.

The amazing thing is, I wonder if they even realize how successful they could be if they simply focused on economic issues? Even CA ousted a Dem governor in favor of a socially liberal/fiscally conservative Rep. The religious fundamentalists are determined to lose for some reason.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on June 29, 2015, 04:55:58 PM
There is an element of the Republican party that would rather lose on principle than win on compromise. If they decide to make 2016 about gay marriage and abortion, they will lose.

The amazing thing is, I wonder if they even realize how successful they could be if they simply focused on economic issues? Even CA ousted a Dem governor in favor of a socially liberal/fiscally conservative Rep. The religious fundamentalists are determined to lose for some reason.

You view this from the wrong angle. THEY don't get to pick that. The DEMOCRATS will FORCE IT ON THEM. It is not optional. It WILL be FORCED upon them. Just facts. Going "I don't want to talk about it"  wont save them. (despite wishful thinking to the contrary)
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on June 30, 2015, 09:37:02 AM
Well, to an extent I agree with you. I'm sure that Hillary would rather that the debates focus on gay marriage and abortion rather than the crappy economy and ISIS.

BUT, nobody forced Ted Cruz to say stupid stuff about the Supreme Court, or forced Abbott to say that TX govt workers can ignore the Court's ruling, or  million other goofy things that Republicans can't seem to stop themselves from blabbing.

Of course Jeb Bush (for example) is going to be asked about his views on contentious issues, that's to be expected. The problem I see is that the social conservatives in his own party are preventing him from giving an honest answer. My guess is that JB probably couldn't care less about gay marriage, and would rather talk about the economy. But, if he says that, he losses the Tea Party. 
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on June 30, 2015, 05:01:26 PM
You don't get my point. I'm not saying that they can't volunteer to say whatever they want, I'm just saying it can't be avoided.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Citylaw on June 30, 2015, 05:08:25 PM
https://youtu.be/iayO0fU0m5g

The man in that video should be President haha. Pretty impressive that Predator featured not one, but two state governors. Why not take it one step further with a President/VP 

How could you not support a Schwarzenegger/Ventura ticket.


Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Groundhog on June 30, 2015, 07:14:39 PM
How could you not support a Schwarzenegger/Ventura ticket.
The Constitution, maybe?   ;D
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on June 30, 2015, 10:11:00 PM
How could you not support a Schwarzenegger/Ventura ticket.
The Constitution, maybe?   ;D
true.......but if you flipped the names (made Schwarzenegger the VP).........I honestly could see the supreme court going "meh, we'll let it pass"

Then again President Chubbs Peterson does have a nice ring to it.................Come to think of it, Carl Weathers does seem to be type casted to be killed off by reptilian creatures with unnaturally humanistic characterisitcs.............. .interesting...........
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on June 30, 2015, 10:13:41 PM
https://youtu.be/iayO0fU0m5g

The man in that video should be President haha. Pretty impressive that Predator featured not one, but two state governors. Why not take it one step further with a President/VP 

How could you not support a Schwarzenegger/Ventura ticket.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonny_Landham
The rabbit hole goes even deeper.................
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Citylaw on July 01, 2015, 01:15:17 PM
When his citizenship becomes an issue the obvious solution is trial by armwresting between Arnold and Scalia.

That is what the founding fathers would have wanted.
 

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on July 01, 2015, 02:48:00 PM
When his citizenship becomes an issue the obvious solution is trial by armwresting between Arnold and Scalia.

That is what the founding fathers would have wanted.

The modern sissy mans version of a duel to the death on the white house lawn??
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on July 05, 2015, 08:54:26 PM
The fragmentation is within the Democratic Party and "dueling progressive agendas"  and in the Republican Party between civil libertarianism and establishment conservatism.

I essentially agree about the basis of the Democratic split, but I think the Republican split I far more damaging to their overall chances.

The Republican split is at least a three way between establishments (Bush), libertarians (Paul), and religious conservatives (Huckabee, Santorum, etc).

 I would argue that at this point the Republicans are in a real bind, a Catch-22. Candidates can't win the nomination or the general election without the evangelicals stepping up and voting, but they're doomed with independents if they appear too evangelical themselves.

The Republicans have allowed this far right element of the party to wield too much influence for too long, and now it's biting them on the a$$.

Even though I'm a Democrat, I hope they figure it out and find a way to be nationally competitive. I don't want there to be one party rule for the next few decades. Competition is good for political parties, it helps minimize corruption. California is a one party state, and look where it got us.

I think that the fragmentation of the Democratic Party is going to lead to a serious lack of enthusiasm at the polls.  Obama dems, and the national Democratic Party;  establishment dems and Reagan/Bill Clinton dems, and the levels of progressives who support people like e. Warren, b Deblasio and b. Sanders. If someone with a true progressive populist agenda wins the nomination then enthusiasm will be up but I think that if clinton makes it to the primaries and wins the nomination she will face the tsunami horde of the entire right wing of the Republican Party.   Then we will have as we independents like to call the "4 year shot"...it's what the democrats had in 2008 and 2009.   The dems have a strange dynamic this time around with clinton/ reminds me of when the pubs ran bob Dole).  and the pubs have the same dynamic they always have but there are not 2 candidates to watch---there are many candidates to watch.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on July 05, 2015, 09:06:28 PM
Republicans are FAR more divided than Dems, and 3rd party is a joke at best for POTUS.
Hillary would galvanize them. Children love tokens.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on July 11, 2015, 09:13:44 PM
When I mention fragmentation I think that while one candidate has the poll numbers another will have the enthusiasm and while the Democratic Party was fragmented during the 2008 primary campaign it eventually coalesced around Obama.   Clinton began with great poll numbers but the enthusiasm was pumping up around Obama; he then began to gain in the polls.  The Republican Party is not only fragmented among different factions but divided among the 8 candidates running. Poll numbers are muddled and there is NO obvious enthusiasm among any one candidate.

Again, this will level out after a long primary season for the pubs slogging it out but the dems fragmentation could break if the gap closes between Clinton and Sanders or it too could level out say if Al Gore enters the race or Biden
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on July 11, 2015, 11:11:21 PM
You are over thinking this

YES the leader in the Republican pointless strawpoll is a promised loser due to the underdog energy or whatever
BUT Hillary is the Democrats TOKEN (just as Obama was) the only "this is the greatest fairytale ever" *&^% out of bills mouth was just because there were two tokens. To be fair he accidently inspired millions by saying that. He was just too stupid to know it. Crazy thing about being drunk on power. You start to act like the town drunk.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on July 12, 2015, 10:57:12 AM
Distill this upcoming election own to it's essential facts, and here's what you're left with:

Regardless of primary season infighting, both Dems and Reps will coalesce around their candidate. A few diehards may not show up and vote because their unhappy with the candidate, but historically these numbers are low.

Democratic turnout will be a little lower, as Obama is not running.

The election will be decided in a handful of states: Florida, Ohio, Colorado, Nevada, and to a lesser extent North Carolina.

In each of these states Dem/Rep registration is very close. Independents will decide the election.

In each of these states, Clinton polls badly among independents.

Like I said before Clinton still has a good shot, but this could be much closer than 2008 or 2012 as long as the Reps don't nominate a nut.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on July 12, 2015, 11:20:50 AM
"In each of these states, Clinton polls badly among independents. "

I have to call BS. There are very few independents. Instead, there are (for the most part) partisans that call themselves independents. See, inter alia, http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/americans-arent-becoming-more-politically-independent-they-just-like-saying-they-are/

Pull quote- "According to the American National Elections Study (ANES), 92 percent of Democrats voted for President Obama in 2012 — just a tad higher than the 88 percent of Democratic-leaning independents who did so. Ninety-two percent of Republicans and 86 percent of Republican-leaning independents voted for Mitt Romney."

The election will come down to the economy at the time (relative to expectations) and the general partisan extremism of the candidate (relative to the partisanship of the party), with the second factor being much less important. And general get out the vote efforts.

We like to tell ourselves "just so" stories after an election, which are almost always untrue. Telling ourselves "just so" stories prior to an election is even more of a fool's errand.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on July 12, 2015, 01:53:56 PM
Obviously, any prognostications this far out are bound to be fraught with unknown variables. The economy, foreign policy crises, scandals, you name it.

It's sort of irrelevant what your personal definition of "independent" is, however. What matters is how they are accounted for in polling data. I agree with you that most independents skew either left or right, and the better polling data accounts for this by distinguishing between Democratic and Republican leaning independents. I also agree (and stated in my previous post) that Democrats will vote Democrat and Republicans will vote Republican.

Here's the difference I see between 2016 and 2008/2012. In most battleground states Obama did pretty well among independents. He even did well in Colorado, where independents skew right.

The most recent polling data from ABC and CNN suggests that Hillary Clinton does not enjoy the same popularity among those designated as "independents". In states like Colorado and Ohio where the margin of victory could be as low as 2-3%, this is potentially impactful.

So, if 90% of Republican leaning independents vote for a Republican (as opposed to the 86% in 2012), and there is lower than 2012 minority turnout, you could see a much tighter race. That's all I'm saying.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on July 12, 2015, 02:08:36 PM
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/06/02/poll-hillary-clinton-plunging-with-independents-in-polls/

Here are the polls I referred to. The link is to Breitbart which is heavily partisan as is the commentary on the polls, but it contains links to the individual polls themselves. It was just easier than tracking down each poll.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on July 12, 2015, 03:10:39 PM
"but it contains links to the individual polls themselves. "

If you look at the subtabs of the CNN poll, you can see that what Breitbart breathlessly reported was, in fact, so-called Democratic independents shifting support to Sanders.

If you believe that people that are currently supporting Sanders won't vote for Clinton in the general, I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.

The sun will rise, the sun will set, I will have lunch, and the election won't come down to so-called independents, or loss of enthusiasm (really, do you remember 2012?) or any of those other factors. It just gives people pointless things to talk about in the meantime.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on July 12, 2015, 08:07:26 PM
It is really quite simple.  At the too soon to tell moment we have fragmentation.  This election will come down to who garners the most enthusiasm and like howard dean and Barack Obama right now only sanders is lighting any fires.  Contrasting and most interesting is the lack of enthusiasm on Clintons side.  As an independent  I can tell you  I don't like the Bush/Clinton option.  Clintons ethics are damaging and Bush's connection to iraq is problematic.  Don't know how other independents feel but the "inevitability" moniker creates a sour choice to most of the independents I know.

Ask yourself this? If both pubs and dems are divided down the middle do you really think enthusiasm will be there for two families that have been creeping around the wings of the Oval Office since the 90's???

Also, I think the pulse of the electorate is still charging toward something newer and different--we have obama to thank for that.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on July 12, 2015, 08:21:06 PM
"but it contains links to the individual polls themselves. "

If you look at the subtabs of the CNN poll, you can see that what Breitbart breathlessly reported was, in fact, so-called Democratic independents shifting support to Sanders.

If you believe that people that are currently supporting Sanders won't vote for Clinton in the general, I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.

The sun will rise, the sun will set, I will have lunch, and the election won't come down to so-called independents, or loss of enthusiasm (really, do you remember 2012?) or any of those other factors. It just gives people pointless things to talk about in the meantime.

Lol. So what WILL it "come down to" then? It's not a loss of enthusiasm it's who HAS the enthusiasm.  I think the enthusiasm that Reagan and Obama stirred up was what won it for them.  Remember the Reagan democrats?   He got dems to come out to the polls for him rather than sit out the election.  Now that is enthusiasm.  Barak Obama nearly all of the black vote.  Now that is enthusiasm.  It will be a major factor in the general.  I'm not writing with confidence; I just want you to think about it.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on July 13, 2015, 08:12:50 AM
"This election will come down to who garners the most enthusiasm and like howard dean and Barack Obama right now only sanders is lighting any fires. "

How did that work for Howard Dean, anyway? Or for McGovern? Or for Ron Paul? Or for [insert name here]?

You do know that Barack Obama won the Democratic nomination in 2008, not by "enthusiasm," but, rather, by exploiting the difference between primaries and caucuses (and proportional / winner takes all). In other words, Obama carefully considered the effects of delegates (and the early disqualified Florida race that year)- Clinton won the popular vote. It's weird how "just so" stories can take hold, isn't it?

And the "Reagan" revolution isn't all that. His vote totals reflect, guess what, running against a deeply unpopular incumbent, with a moribund economy (one might call it a malaise, ahem), with a fresh foreign policy disaster before the election (Iran). The so-called "Reagan Democrats" are nothing more than the realignment started by Nixon- you might want to look up his state's right speech in Mississippi. Yes, he continued and solidified the process of winning the south, but (and there is some irony here) also continued the process of losing the West and NE.

The "enthusiasm" angle is invariably kicked around by people who want you to contribute to their campaign with time and money. Yes, it can affect the margins, but so-called enthusiasm is not the cause of a campaign- it is the product of other factors. Put more simply, McGovern was going to get hosed, no matter how enthusiastic his supporters were.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on July 13, 2015, 08:14:05 AM
If you believe that people that are currently supporting Sanders won't vote for Clinton in the general, I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.

Of course most will vote for Clinton anyway, but others simply won't vote at all because to a lot of very liberal Democrats Clinton is no better than Bush. They think she's a globalist, corporatist war monger.

That, combined with lower minority turnout (because no matter what either party blathers about diversity, this is White Millionaire vs White Millionaire), will likely result in a few less Democratic votes.

Most swing states were not won by huge margins. A few less votes can make the race considerably tighter.   
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on July 13, 2015, 08:29:12 AM
"Most swing states were not won by huge margins."

Let's take 2012. That's was real close, right? So.... there were only four states decided by less than 5 (!) percentage points. Only one (Florida, of course) decided by less than a percentage point. But Florida is so big, that was still a swing of 75,000 votes. Virginia was 150,000 votes. That's a lot to chalk up to people who won't vote at all.

I feel like people have never been through Presidential elections. Do you remember 2008? When Clinton and Obama had such a heated primary, there were a bunch of people that said Obama couldn't win *because Clinton supporters would never rally behind Obama*? Anyone? How did that work out?

And what about the other side? People saying the weak field doesn't give the GOP a chance... and yet, Clinton emerged out of the crud Democratic field in 1992 (look that one up).

You are all wasting your own time. See how the economy is doing next year. See who the GOP nominee is (because, absent some gaffe from Clinton along the lines of "Yes, I really did kill Vince Foster," she is getting the nomination for the Democrats). Then pay attention. It really is all meaningless blather until then. I would have thought that a rudimentary acquaintance with statistics and some of the work being done would have ended the fascination with the hot air political sites... but, alas, it is not to be.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on July 13, 2015, 03:31:12 PM
To me this seems beyond simple (albeit politically incorrect)
The parties have their usual die hards, and the sway votes, that never really changes

TOKENS are what does it. Obama had even Colon Powell (a die hard Republican) vote for him. It was a skin issue. Simple as that.
Same with Hillary. The teaparty wives will lie to their spouses but still vote for the fellow vagina.

Its that simple folks. That tiebreaker is what won Obama, it is what will win Hillary.

PC is fine, but reality is better.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Groundhog on July 13, 2015, 05:07:44 PM
Uh...without going into the analysis above, I'll mention this: electoral math. It, and demographics generally, favor the Democrats.

On the Democratic side, I think Bernie Sanders is making some progress against Hillary Clinton. He's got her outgunned on enthusiasm. Where this breaks apart is his appeal to minority groups. Black Americans are solidly behind Clinton so far. Pi can argue it's because of her association with Bill and Barack, the "two" black presidents, but regardless of the reasoning Bernie has some work to do in minority communities.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on July 13, 2015, 05:16:50 PM
Uh...without going into the analysis above, I'll mention this: electoral math. It, and demographics generally, favor the Democrats.

No doubt about it.

Many pundits believe she starts with as many as 247 electoral votes. That seems a little high, but even if you knock out a couple of states she's still starting with around 220-230. She can afford to lose a couple of swing states, but a Republican has to take the bigger ones.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on July 13, 2015, 10:49:10 PM
Bill wasn't black, and Hillary asking Obama about it and Obama joking about him dancing...................abo ut sums it up
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IuQgWtRIoNQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gNH-KiTqskM

and the "um" and "without going into" prove my point. Its kneejerk programed into the brain. "shhh, shutup, we're only supposed to be surrounded by it, not acknowledge it surrounding us.....SSSSSSHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on July 14, 2015, 08:12:38 AM
"TOKENS are what does it. Obama had even Colon Powell (a die hard Republican) vote for him. It was a skin issue."

Oh, stop, Please. You are revealing far too much about yourself (and you probably don't want to).

Let's try some numbers- Obama's share of the black vote in 2012: 93%.
Al Gore's share of the black vote in 2000: Either 90% or 92% (depending on how it was measured).

....so, there it is.

Reagan got 47% of the women in 1980, and then, when there was a woman on the ticket against him in 1984 (look it up), he got... 58%.

Partisan affiliation trumps race and gender. Or, if you'd prefer, race and (to a lesser extent) gender correlate with partisan affiliation.

And Hillary Clinton will get between 90-95% of the black vote in 2016. And between 53-58% of the female vote (Obama received 55 and 56%).

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on July 14, 2015, 08:49:23 AM
It is worth noting, however, that black voter turnout in 2008 was up by 2 million. I think it's safe to say that this was due to the fact that a black candidate was running and the Democrats were able to build on that fact.

Given that the total number of voters was something like 130 million this may seem small, but it made the difference in states like North Carolina. 

Pie may have put it, er, a bit bluntly, but people who have been denied participation in the system for a long time are bound to get excited when they feel a connection to the candidate. All those Irish Catholics who voted for Eisenhower lined up around the block to vote for JFK, then voted for Nixon in '68.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on July 14, 2015, 09:06:21 AM
Voter turnout in 2008 : 57.1% of the voting population.
In 2004: 55.7% of the voting population.

The story isn't the increase in black (and minority) turnout- it's the decrease of white turnout.
Percentages-
White-
2004: 67.2%
2008:  60.0%

Black-
2004: 60.0%
2008: 64.7%

Hispanic-
2004: 47.2%
2008: 49.9%

Asian-
2004: 44.2%
2008: 47.6%

While you could make the argument that this was due to a black candidate (the TOKEN argument), I think it is inarguable that the overall effort that Obama put into the GOTV efforts (which has been well documented) at the local level is the leading indicator for the across-the-board turnout increases in the key democratic constituencies. If you recall, it was difficult to not run into people that were helping you get to the polls.

Also, your "just so" memory of the Catholic vote isn't correct. While the statistics show that Kennedy did overperform in the Catholic vote, it is also true that the Catholics voted against Eisenhower, voted against Nixon in '68, split the vote in '72, voted for Carter in '76, split the vote in '80, and, if you look at history since FDR, have either split the vote (basically) or voted Democratic in every election except for 1984.

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on July 14, 2015, 10:06:36 AM
Yes, a decrease in white voters PLUS an increase in minority voters combined to work in Obama's favor.

I wouldn't say that it's merely an argument based on abstract tokenism, however. The Democratic campaign actively sought to make full use of the excitement generated by the first black candidate, and it worked. They gained votes with black, Hispanic, Asian, and young (18-24) voters. I mean, do you honestly think that the increase in black voters was unrelated to Obama's status?

https://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases/archives/voting/cb09-110.html

 
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on July 14, 2015, 10:20:20 AM
" I mean, do you honestly think that the increase in black voters was unrelated to Obama's status?"

cf.

"They gained votes with black, Hispanic, Asian, and young (18-24) voters."

The Obama campaign invested heavily in GOTV efforts by building both technology and local offices in an unprecedented fashion (and this built on his earlier, and canny, success in gaming the system in the Democratic primaries). This allowed them to narrow-target to both "remind" people to go to the polls, and to get people registered to vote. This has been well documented. The *across-the-board* increases not only are evidence of this, but specifically argue against the *TOKEN* point you are making- there is no particular reason that young, Asian, or Hispanic voters would be particularly amenable to a black candidate. While I don't disagree that there was some effect at the margins, this "just so" story does a great disservice to what was, in effect, a GOTV revolution that the GOP is still trying to catch up to (and the Dem effort was, in effect, a tech response to the GOP effort that arose due to Rove in 2000 and was incredibly successful).

Shorter version- it is borderline insulting to attribute the GOTV effort of the Obama campaign to "more black people showed up because Obama was black." The more correct statement is that Obama increased the overall electorate, which greatly helped him (Democrats have an advantage when the electoral base in increased), but his actual percentage of the black vote wasn't that superior compared to an "average" candidate like Al Gore. Admittedly, it's hard to improve on 92%. Finally, attributing these types of identifications to voters when the evidence overwhelmingly shows that voters are partisan first ignores what we are seeing. Just like the great debate about the "independents," who, as we saw before, are almost are partisans who are labeling themselves independents.

I hate to keep getting back to actualities, but this is part of the annoying things about out discourse in this country. We like to tell ourselves these stories about politics, most of which just aren't true. I guess it makes it more interesting, and more enjoyable for people to follow.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on July 14, 2015, 10:45:22 AM
"In 2008 we obviously had a historic candidacy", said Paul Taylor, executive vice president of the Pew Center. "That's certainly a plausible explanation for the spike in African American turnout."

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/21/us/politics/21vote.html

It is not insulting to acknowledge that people who have been marginalized would find renewed interest when the system finally produces a candidate who they believe can sympathize with their particular issues. This isn't especially difficult to understand, nor controversial, nor does it ignore other contributing factors.

I'm not sure why you have such a hard time grasping it. The Pew Center gets it, the Democrats get it, maybe one day even the Republicans will get it.   
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on July 14, 2015, 11:10:00 AM
"I'm not sure why you have such a hard time grasping it. The Pew Center gets it, the Democrats get it, maybe one day even the Republicans will get it. "

Yes, the Pew Center presents a theory. Of course, this doesn't explain why other groups also so increased turnout. Or why a particular group so greatly decreased turnout. The Pew Center (and others) are precisely what I am criticizing- the "just so" stories that are *belied* by the evidence. Obama grew the electorate among all the categories that were key to his vitory- even Hispanics, a group that, notably, the GOP had previously courted (oops).

And then you elided his next statement- " The question was, Would other minorities vote for this minority? Not only did he get a big vote, but he got a big turnout."

Now, what could account for that? The famous Asian/Hispanic/Black TOKENISM? Or perhaps, there is an underlying causative variable at work? Just maybe? Something with a little deeper explanatory power?

This is why we can't have nice things. Because people prefer hot air to statistics. As best put by Nate Silve, what happened in 2008 is - "The 2008 election was an anomaly. A Democratic wave nationally — caused by a deeply unpopular Republican in the White House and a financial crisis — as well as a strong get-out-the-vote effort by the Obama campaign[.]"

The economy. The (lingering) incumbent. And a dash of GOTV.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on July 14, 2015, 11:26:13 AM
Obama appointed Julian Castro, the Mayor of San Antonio, to a Cabinet position last year. This was widely viewed as a move to help prepare Castro for national office. Now, Castro is highly likely to be chosen as Hillary Clinton's VP. The idea being touted by Henry Cisneros and many others is that a Latino candidate will energize Latino voters. The Clinton campaign is very warm to this lobbying effort.

I assume you believe the campaign is mistaken in this assumption?

If so, then I commend you for having greater political insight than either the Obama administration or the Clinton campaign, that's very impressive. 
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on July 14, 2015, 11:40:53 AM
.... again, your "received wisdom" and "just so" stories aren't cutting it.

What, do you think that if Marco Rubio gets the nomination, that he will magically win the "Hispanic" vote? Because people have said that?

Because the hot air classes that chatter, without any basis, don't understand that "Hispanic" (or Latin/o/a) isn't monolithic, right? I mean, we'd be offended if someone said that we're putting a white person on the ballot to get the white vote, wouldn't we? And that the Cubans in Miami have a very different interest than the Dominicans in Orlando than the Puerto Ricans in New York than the Mexicans in Los Angeles? Just for starters?

Or that policies (specifically, the GOP hostility toward even legal immigration) won't matter just a tad?

No, I'm not surprised that Castro was moved to the cabinet- not from some weird maneuvering, but because the Democratic bench is weak (due to the 2010 census and lack of prominent state-level politicians), and because Castro doesn't have much room, right now, to move upwards in Texas. I would be neither surprised nor unsurprised if he was on the ticket, but-
Bentsen didn't carry Texas.
Ryan didn't carry his home state.
Ferraro didn't help... at all... with the woman's vote.
H.W. Bush wasn't selected to win Texas- that was in the bag, and he wasn't really a "Texas" guy.
Kemp wasn't selected to win NY, and there was never any hope of winning it.
The last 16 years of VPs were not chosen for their electoral chances (both Biden and Cheney came from safe states with no impact on the election), because people have gradually realized that VP choices really don't matter.

Arguably, the last VP selection to matter was LBJ... and that choice was kind of sui generis (and it wasn't for Texas- it was to keep the entire South... this was the whole Dixiecrat thing, remember).

So... do I believe that Castro supporters are trying to float a trial balloon for gullible people to raise their guy's profile? Sure. Will I pay any attention to it whatsoever? Nope.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on July 14, 2015, 06:54:57 PM
"TOKENS are what does it. Obama had even Colon Powell (a die hard Republican) vote for him. It was a skin issue."

Oh, stop, Please. You are revealing far too much about yourself (and you probably don't want to).

Let's try some numbers- Obama's share of the black vote in 2012: 93%.
Al Gore's share of the black vote in 2000: Either 90% or 92% (depending on how it was measured).

....so, there it is.

Reagan got 47% of the women in 1980, and then, when there was a woman on the ticket against him in 1984 (look it up), he got... 58%.

Partisan affiliation trumps race and gender. Or, if you'd prefer, race and (to a lesser extent) gender correlate with partisan affiliation.

And Hillary Clinton will get between 90-95% of the black vote in 2016. And between 53-58% of the female vote (Obama received 55 and 56%).
The unavoidable kneejerk responses that I mentioned are programed deep enough that "oh stop-insert ad hominem" is so strong that it is well, unavoidable.
Thus a huge chunk of my point. Emperors new clothes.

It is what it is, reality matters.
Case in point.
http://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2013/11/11/pkg-white-politican-implies-black-fliers.khou

social science is just that.........SCIENCE (proven and tested facts)

-Al Gore wasn't running against a black guy..............nor Reagan against a Woman.........I'm not sure you are understanding the point. (the point being that the handful of percent more defected from the other side BECUASE of the reasons I mentioned) Yes most black vote Democrat so there wasn't a ton left to defect, but since so many woman tend to vote Republican, expect a MUCH larger impact with Hillary. THAT is my point.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on July 15, 2015, 07:32:37 AM
"social science is just that.........SCIENCE (proven and tested facts)"

There is, of course, some humor in this statement. While social science proceeds along a scientific process, it is not "science" in the sense of physics, or chemistry, or even biology. It is more akin to the "science" of economics.

All of this is made more humorous by your complete rejection of all the evidence presented to you, and, instead, resorting to the same old tired arguments. You know, there are actual people doing "science" in politics- not political science, mind you, but usually math- often statistics. Tell me, what is the most recent statistics research telling us about the Bradley effect?

Since you seem to have missed the entire point of my posts, what I reject is people asserting stuff they believe, and, instead, looking at actual evidence. Politics, like many fields before it, needs to have a little more rigor applied to it. You are like one of those old-timey baseball managers that claims that RBIs is the most measure of a player's worth.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on July 15, 2015, 01:18:32 PM
um...........ditto?

"make fun of other party, attempt to belittle" "ignore facts presented, even though they clearly acknowledged your facts with counter facts and counter arguments"

copy and paste, use Ad nauseam
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on July 15, 2015, 02:15:20 PM
Ditto would be a devastating argument, indeed, if you had presented any statistics, math, science, or really anything to back up your "TOKEN" argument.

I presented, you know, actual statistics, numbers, and so on. You gave us a "It's not news, it's CNN!" video. Congratulations. I assume you're proud of yourself.

That said, I appreciate your contributions; sunlight, as always, is the best disinfectant.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on July 15, 2015, 06:07:28 PM
you...........used the cookie cutter copy and paste ad lib WRONG................(sigh)
pats on head, gives cookie. Removes sharp objects from room.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on July 17, 2015, 09:02:28 PM
So, I think when we talk about enthusiasm we can say that it's like energy; politicians like howard dean, Barak Obama and Ronald Reagan all had the enthusiasm factor.  And like energy, political enthusiasm has a duality.  Energy has a potential factor and a kinetic factor.  Enthusiasm for a politician can be measured by crowds flocking to hear the message or the potential factor--- the trick is the kinetic part of enthusiasm and barak obamas souls going to the polls as voter turnout is the butter from the milk.   
Dean had the enthusiasm as well with huge crowds coming to hear him- then he went negative in his campaign with gephardt and that was a crucial mistake.  He lost the potential enthusiasm and didn't get the souls to the polls so he failed with the kinetic part of the equation.   
Reagan also had the huge crowd interest and like Obama he got not only souls to the polls but he managed to turn blue pennsylvania into a red state by getting democrats to come out and vote for him.  Those were the Reagan democrats who have nothing to do with Nixon as some think.  Most Reagan democrats are Catholics who came out to support Reagan in 1980.  For evidence simply look at counties like erie, pa. 

Dixiecrats are another topic altogether.

Enthusiasm is sanders key right now, as he has huge crowd appeal, a captivating message, an authenticity and he will not go negative.  Sanders has the potential energy in his campaign and quite a buzz--- the question is can he get the souls to the polls in Iowa and New Hampshire.

If he wins Iowa and New Hampshire he will be like McCarthy in 68 bouncing the incumbent, LBJ about of the race.  Hillary could conceivably stand in as the incumbent.  This got rf Kennedy into that race.  Hillary could get bounced but more than likely will keep burning that war chest throughout the rest primaries to no avail.  But then........

So I'm watching to see when and if al gore enters the race or Biden. 
Gore or Biden would be like Kennedy. 

Let's face it while most progressives supporting sanders would begrudgingly cast a vote for clinton in the general if sanders doesn't make it past the first two primaries she will not have nearly enough kinetic energy to get the souls to the polls.  Liberal democrats may decide to sit this one out with no horse in
the race.

And, lol lol lol, if clinton is the nominee you can bet that the entire right wing of the republican party will not miss an election to keep clinton out of the Oval Office... Lol, cal it  " reverse enthusiasm."

So, for SOME candidates enthusiasm and upward trends in enthusiasm.  Crowd interest and then actual cast votes is a major factor already.  Don't be foolish to think it is a trivial matter. 
Reagan and Obama had the enthusiasm factor and both played it well.  Sanders could as well.

Keep thinking about it and of course we all know it is way too soon to call this one but it is fun to discuss, this should be obvious.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on July 18, 2015, 12:06:31 AM
I think that if Sanders does town hall meetings throughout late august early September in Allendale,  richland, barnwell, darlington, calhoun,  chester,  chesterfield, williamsberg, sumpter, and richland, in South Carolina he could make in roads with that state.  And call it a two week travel blitz.  Think about it if he wins Iowa and the granite state then has a good percentage show in South Carolina it will be another fair  political tale...déjà vous all over again.   

But what could really help his campaign is if he brings his northern accented message to 4 counties in Alabama--Montgomery, Sumter , Macon, and bullock, again all town hall meeting type of setting county fairs on the weekend?

This would be of course if lower funded progressive democrats can really get motivated with a truly open message, public speech and then streamlined  question and answer tour.  Defining sanders as a very accessible candidate. 

They will have to Pepper in trips to Michigan and Louisiana.




Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on July 18, 2015, 12:13:11 AM
Dang Cin, you really have done a comeback since the multi year break. I take it you started posting in LSAT prep and then said "1L is Hell, see you suckaz after the bar exam??"

Either way, glad to have a fellow resident in this ghost town of ours. I think they killed Julie while you were gone (praise be the Jesus)
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on July 18, 2015, 11:12:13 AM
Dang Cin, you really have done a comeback since the multi year break. I take it you started posting in LSAT prep and then said "1L is Hell, see you suckaz after the bar exam??"

Either way, glad to have a fellow resident in this ghost town of ours. I think they killed Julie while you were gone (praise be the Jesus)

Thank you infant 8 one,  this board rustles and creaks like a dilapidated old Victorian hidden on a mountain amidst the overgrown ivy.  And I have a wicked sense of humor.  I read many of that dude, Julie ferns posts and oh what a little peepeed shill he was.  I read some of the counter posts to his nonsense and a few of them totally schooled that tool and made him look foolish. You are one of them.

I have a feeling that he was a law school prep test salesman who had too much time on his little typing fingers.  Im somewhat glad he's gone but looks like there were some epic arguments to get that guy some gospel, so to speak. 

So let's continue to have fun with this board.

I waited two over two years to respond because I found it to be extremely funny( which it still is) (to me and some others) hope you found some small humor in it.  After all comedy is about timing. And, you are right, I was busy.

Thank you and let's have fuuuuuunnnnnn!!!!  But seriously, not in howard dean fashion, but let's get daffy!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on July 22, 2015, 07:28:03 PM
Wow clinton tanking in swing states.  Better recheck the calculus as Obama would say and......

Better call Gore.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Groundhog on July 22, 2015, 09:20:21 PM
Do you actually think that a severely weakened Hillary with no other viable candidates could lead to the first brokered convention since Adlai Stevenson in 1952 and that the nominee would be Gore? I'm not sure how to evaluate that, but I doubt it would be Gore if the convention were brokered.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on July 23, 2015, 04:00:47 PM
Hillary will win the nomination
pre primary math is just for the lulz

I honestly hope Trump wins the Republicans, that would make for good SNL jokes if nothing else.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on July 25, 2015, 09:58:17 AM
Lol. We are not going to get to a convention nomination situation.  Clinton has been in the public eye for decades and with negative polls and serious character questions plus potential criminal allegations she will never be able to re convince people that she could be the leader of the free world---deleter of the free world maybe.   

So I say, better call gore.  He could be the new inspiration for clinton disenchantment but get him up and running by Christmas.

Good luck to the clinton diehards, though. 



Denial is tough to endure.

FYI. Trump won't make it either.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on July 25, 2015, 12:01:27 PM
The battle between associated press lawsuits for foia and the state department/clinton/Obama camp is fascinating to watch.  I'm not a fan of the 4th estate so I am secretly pulling for the state dept/Obama administration/clinton machine to beat the press and not give up anything and win their war against the press forcing transparency. 

I think the press is one of the most powerful systems in our country and nobody wins over them.  Even when the press get it wrong the mea culpa is usually a tiny retraction.   

But if anyone can beat the press it is the clinton machine...I wish them luck.

The problem now is that the inspectors general have joined the fight for clintons server and soon the dept of justice(obamas proxy) are going to be involved further escalating the war for information.  So this is a non partisan battle.

I hope hillary keeps her server till the end but turning it over my be the only thing that will save her political career...


Battle on!! Don't let the fourth estate win!!!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on July 25, 2015, 04:09:38 PM
I don't support Hillary in any way but she will get the nomination. 100%. ZERO chance she won't.
It doesn't matter if she admitted to being Bill Cosbies date rape drug dealer. It honestly wouldn't.
Tokens.
Just a fact.
Watch.

Cinnamon you love the long wait to repost. Do so post primary. Lets regroup on this then.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on July 29, 2015, 04:34:42 PM
 No need to wait til the primaries to discuss this further because with the clinton/trump drama there are interesting and fun things every week if not every couple of days.

I understand your token/sheep theory but Obama, while being the "token" in the last two presidential election IS a kickass speech giver---charismatic and engaging.  His speeches and a good swing state map plan got him elected.  If tokens/sheep were the answer Jesse Jackson should have been elected years ago when he ran, right?

Let me ask you this... If the republicans nominate Fiorina and Biden becomes the nominee because clinton was forced out and or Sanders is the nominee do you think that the token female would be automatically elected?

What if Marco Rubio is the nominee against Biden?  Will his "token" Spanish presence be the deciding factor over Biden or Sanders?  How would your token theory work with those setups, 8?

Ps if clinton is under investigation for destroying top secret, classified info she will have to legally deal with it and she will be disgraced like petraeus and Nixon....she doesn't need to deal drugs to Cosby....that was funny, man.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on July 30, 2015, 11:04:18 AM
You have to factor in the full formula

VIABLE token + Uncle Tom = Canidate

That was the problem that McCain didn't see in Palin. He didn't do the math.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on August 04, 2015, 09:55:31 AM
Okay, let's make this interesting. Apparently, the Trump campaign may last for a while. While I stick to my original belief (it will be Bush, with Walker, or perhaps Rubio, with an outside shot), let's make this interesting. How will Trump end up-

a. He will bow out before seriously contesting any primary.
b. He will contest a few early primaries, do poorly, then drop out.
c. He will contest some early primaries with mixed results, then drop out.
d. He will go to the end, lose to the eventual nominee, and speak at the convention.
e. Brokered convention! (No. There is never a brokered convention. Seriously. Look at the rule changes. They love to talk about it because it's exciting. It won't happen.)
f. TRUMP IS WORTH TEN BEEELEEEON DOLLARS AND IS YOUR 2016 GOP CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT, BABY!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Citylaw on August 04, 2015, 10:23:55 AM
F. Media  loves him and will keep reporting that he is ahead my wide margins in the polls they make up  and then people will vote for the name recognition then 2020 a Kardashian will win and the world will end.



Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 05, 2015, 03:29:22 PM
Still not sure what you mean, 8?  Token plus Uncle Tom?

Is hillary an Uncle Tom?  Is she token plus Uncle Tom?
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on August 05, 2015, 04:59:13 PM
Still not sure what you mean, 8?  Token plus Uncle Tom?

Is hillary an Uncle Tom?  Is she token plus Uncle Tom?
As far as women go, kind of yeah.
She gets the votes from guys who would vote for her just due to bill.

No one wants a deep end nut job. People like Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton fall into that category for many voters. Same idea with if she was some militant lesbian who had artificial insemination JUST to get an abortion type.

"Uncle Tom" might not be cross applicable or the best term........palatable is a better term to use I suppose.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on August 05, 2015, 05:02:26 PM
Okay, let's make this interesting. Apparently, the Trump campaign may last for a while. While I stick to my original belief (it will be Bush, with Walker, or perhaps Rubio, with an outside shot), let's make this interesting. How will Trump end up-

a. He will bow out before seriously contesting any primary.
b. He will contest a few early primaries, do poorly, then drop out.
c. He will contest some early primaries with mixed results, then drop out.
d. He will go to the end, lose to the eventual nominee, and speak at the convention.
e. Brokered convention! (No. There is never a brokered convention. Seriously. Look at the rule changes. They love to talk about it because it's exciting. It won't happen.)
f. TRUMP IS WORTH TEN BEEELEEEON DOLLARS AND IS YOUR 2016 GOP CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT, BABY!
He will go all the way just to keep seeing his face on tv and hearing his own voice (the dude has mental issues that any other high school grad who never applied to a job that his own father didn't own would die naked in the street as soon as their dad died)

I honestly expect him to lose the primary and then run (half assed) as third party just to push his way into debates the way Ross Perot did.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 05, 2015, 08:32:51 PM
Ok, 8 I think I get it now.

Isn't Donald Trump a democrat? 

His campaign is more of a stunt by a media craving publicity hound.  He will be around for a while contrasting his train wreck campaign with hillary clintons daily train wreck. 
The other less known swill look a bit more serious, trustworthy, and soberly competent.

Think of how much more Donald will make after a run at the presidency.

Meanwhile I think that taking bets about trump is interesting but the real money should be on hillary clintons fate and outcome? 

She might face some real legal trouble and handling classified info is not taken lightly.

She has so much money she could still run and fight the charges.  But if she loses security clearance she'll be like Nixon considering using the army to keep the presidency. Lol
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on August 06, 2015, 07:49:35 AM
"I honestly expect him to lose the primary and then run (half assed) as third party just to push his way into debates the way Ross Perot did."

Interesting point. I should have added that as a betting option. That would be a disaster for the GOP, because even if he peels away a small amount of the vote... I imagine there would be a lot of pressure on him not to run as a third party candidate, but he does have a Trump-sized ego.

"but the real money should be on hillary clintons fate and outcome?"

Betting markets currently have her at between 1:4 to 1:7; in contrast to Sanders who is at approximately 10:1. You might want to think about that. If it helps, Clinton currently is in better condition (in terms of endorsements, money raised relative to the field, and other markers) than any non-incumbent Democratic nominee, ever. I'm not a Clinton fan, but saying she is in worse shape than the clown car that is the GOP field is, well, interesting.

"Think of how much more Donald will make after a run at the presidency."

While running is lucrative for the crazies, like Santorum, because it helps their brand (speaking fees, media appearances in the off years), it will certainly cost Trump money both directly during the campaign and afterwards. Businesses aren't big with controversy, and while there will be groups of people that may like him more, his business brand will suffer, as it already is. This is a vanity project- not a rational economic decision. The amount he loses in business opportunities > than the amount he will gain in book sales, speaking fees, etc.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on August 06, 2015, 05:27:51 PM
I honestly doubt its about making money to trump, he just likes being the center of attention
He clearly has a litany of mental illnesses ranging from narcissism to down right good old fashioned learning disabilities (he barely even finished high school-look it up, heck listen to his voice and watch his face when he talks)
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 07, 2015, 07:39:06 PM
Lol jeez man I guess  hyperbole is too abstract for some people. 
I'm not "betting" literally but I think the more interesting dynamic in the primary race is not democrat/republican/hillary clinton supporter Donald trump---he's a funny bit player---it's the FBI investigation into hillary clinton regarding keeping and destroying classified info. 

Here is why, we have not had such a super high profile politician fall from grace in a drip drip fashion since the FBI began its preliminary investigation of Richard Nixon and he denied any wrong doing up until he had to quit the presidency.   

With hillary clinton, regardless of the actual past and present odds on she becomes president that is all going down the toilet in a drip drip fashion...

If you remember the history of nixons ultimate downfall he was great until he got caught--just like poor hillary.

So, trying to convince people that the trump story is more compelling then hillary clintons inevitable "ness" turning into "not likely at all" is short shrift.

Let me give you an example: I cannot wait until Monday to hear new stuff about hillarys secret server and what the FBI will discover; after that inane supposed debate with trump looking like an ass I could care less about him.  He was mildly predictable and somewhat boring and a buzzkill compared to the hype around his off the cuff remarks. 

Sorry I'm a cynic and Clinton's nixonian parallel and fall from grace is VERY compelling.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 07, 2015, 07:54:35 PM
Even a more quirky somewhat ironic twist in the clown car debate was Marco Rubio's sober self confidence and charisma.  The younger politician in the room seemed to be the adult above the fray.

He even attacked hillary clinton on her duplicity and policy--not a character assasination.

He was the only good thing I saw out of the so called debate which ironically again had quite a national audience.


I haven't made up my mind who I'm picking yet but so far Bernie sanders has honesty a real genuineness and a straightforward record to back it up.   Some of the republicans have to do a little more till I find a favorite in their group. 

As an independent we like a good spoiler to an all out one party congress; but we are fickle and two branches of government with one party controlling both can be a release point for beurocratic gridlock---at least for one term of a presidency.

Sorry trump and clinton don't cut the mustard.  If you don't believe me check out the numbersAnd I think most polling of independents don't have us favoring clinton or trump.


Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on August 08, 2015, 11:20:05 AM
The investigation into Hillary means jack. Almost all politicians have that stuff happen to them on some level (most often RAPE, full on RAPE) but they do just fine if they have the momentum behind them anyways (the rapists like it from behind I guess) She'll be fine. 100% chance of that.

Even the ones who are "punished" are a joke. Look at her husband, or Olly North. All joke punishments. All still had careers after that too.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on August 08, 2015, 01:04:18 PM
"The investigation into Hillary means jack."

Yep. On that we're in complete agreement. Not sure what cinnamon is smokin', but I hope it's legal in her/his jurisdiction.

Or look up Whitewater. Or Vince Foster. Or Hillarycare. Or Benghazi. Or ... well, google it.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on August 08, 2015, 03:19:30 PM
Half of that list you just gave is stuff she did.............or that doesn't matter.
Hillarycare wasn't anything that anyone could possibly get in trouble for
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 09, 2015, 08:59:30 AM
The investigation into Hillary means jack. Almost all politicians have that stuff happen to them on some level (most often RAPE, full on RAPE) but they do just fine if they have the momentum behind them anyways (the rapists like it from behind I guess) She'll be fine. 100% chance of that.

Even the ones who are "punished" are a joke. Look at her husband, or Olly North. All joke punishments. All still had careers after that too.

Lmao.  It is a joke. That's the point. Even today hillarys right hand man huma abedin is in trouble.  Hillary, huma and her lawyer are all going to be under oath that they turned over all classified documents as ordered by a federal judge.  It is amazing how deep it gets as the summer wears on.

I guess you guys aren't following or don't follow news from legal,  business, political periodicals.  That's ok. You'll catch on soon enough.

"Hillary Clinton's  exempting herself from the practices imposed on the 24,000 Foreign Service officers and Civil Service workers she oversaw has led to resentment from some former subordinates. And by holding onto the official emails until the State Department was prompted by Congress to ask for them, and then deciding for herself which to preserve, Mrs. Clinton may have provoked mistrust even as she asks American voters to send her to the Oval Office."

These emails contain mucho highly classified info that hillaryo  didnto think she'd get caught holding...but she did. 

Small time mishandling of classified info is a criminal punishable offense.

Nixon thought he could get away with his private communications set up and it BURNED him---he was inevitably going to retain the presidency.  He did not.

Hillary is in that same drip drip boat---and she can't use "national security" reasons to hide behind.

Don't believe me.  That too makes this funny that you guys don't care to see it. It's okay.

This is not Whitewater rafting or lying about a cigar job. Lol

Watching hillarys downfall is sad but inevitable.  It makes for great political theatre

Just like tricky male private part nixon
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 17, 2015, 01:31:30 PM
....i hear crickets and tumbkeweeds now--- lmao.

So, what was that about the FBI investigating Nixon, ER I mean Clinton?

Just heard Woodward say the sane thing I was writing three weeks ago...

Drip drip drip mrs Clinton.  This slow implosion is fun to watch. 

One thing is for sure. Barring a Republican part that shoots itself in the foot. We are not getting a Democrat in the Whitehouse.
Clinton is legal toast. 

Where is the home brew server now?

This is awesome and hilarious.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on August 17, 2015, 02:52:28 PM
 "Barring a Republican part[y] that shoots itself in the foot."

The three leaders for the GOP nomination, currently, and the only ones polling in double digits:
Trump, Carson, Cruz.

In order to shoot itself in the foot, the GOP would have to take said foot out of its mouth. Wouldn't want a headshot, after all.

"Clinton is legal toast."

Nope. Now, if you wanted to make a case that a drawn-out accumulation of innuendo might draw a serious challenger into the race, that would be interesting (no, Sanders and O'Malley are not serious). There's certainly time for that, and, inter alia, Biden's camp has floated the rumor. But unless and until that happens, I'd bet on the status quo. You rarely lose money with that.


Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 17, 2015, 08:17:10 PM
Nope. Now, if you wanted to make a case that a drawn-out accumulation of innuendo

Now, like Clinton you are changing your story.  First Clinton was a sure thing--even gambling odds ---)she IS going to be the one nominated.  Now you introduce the caveat of "innuendo". 

Well innuendo or no innuendo it is very enjoyable watching Clinton go down. The thing about status quo is that every so often the koolaid wears off and like the FBI confiscating nixons private correspondence followed by his subsequent resignation change follows  happenstance.

Nixon didnt need a legal team either he was bread right up until he was toast. Lol

Loki? Dont you know that when the FBI investigates a politician it doesn't end well for the politician? You seem cerebral enough to get this.
Dont believe me?  See what bob Woodward said about Clinton's chances of success.

It is fun to watch because the vise tightens every day.  Republicans with trump is nowhere near as interesting---) they have a long way to go and unfortunately for establishment democrats the  writing is on Hillary Clinton's firewall.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on August 17, 2015, 09:29:37 PM
"Barring a Republican part[y] that shoots itself in the foot."

The three leaders for the GOP nomination, currently, and the only ones polling in double digits:
Trump, Carson, Cruz.

In order to shoot itself in the foot, the GOP would have to take said foot out of its mouth. Wouldn't want a headshot, after all.

"Clinton is legal toast."

Nope. Now, if you wanted to make a case that a drawn-out accumulation of innuendo might draw a serious challenger into the race, that would be interesting (no, Sanders and O'Malley are not serious). There's certainly time for that, and, inter alia, Biden's camp has floated the rumor. But unless and until that happens, I'd bet on the status quo. You rarely lose money with that.
Don't waste energy arguing with partisans. They are like theists. They start with a conclusion and then work backwards from there.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on August 18, 2015, 06:03:00 AM
"Now, like Clinton you are changing your story.  First Clinton was a sure thing--even gambling odds"

I haven't changed my story. You seem incapable of reading. And her odds (either 1-5, or 1-6 for the Demcoratic nomination, even odds for Presidency) are the same. Status quo, remember.

The only way that will change is that if enough eventually comes out that a real player in Democratic politics comes out to challenge her (because that means that she has lot support where it matters, and the powers that be know it). That's when you will know that any of this stuff actually matters outside of your own echo chamber.

That's also why I'm not overly concerned that the GOP field has Trump, Carson, and Cruz as the frontrunners right now. We can check in again later.

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 18, 2015, 09:26:35 AM
8? Bernie dancers is a Democrat.  Unless you truly think he's a socialist in which case you'd be slightly mistaken and he's going to win new Hampshire. Maybe Iowa.  Hardly partisan.

And loki, you have given the impression that you think Clinton is a sure thing.  You introduced your
"big player" maybe coming out to hedge your bet, no?

And the very funny part is that presently not in an echo chamber, whatever that means, but in reality the FBI is conducting a criminal investigation regarding compromised classified and top secret info Clinton knowingly mishandled.

Loki, you are aware that the FBI dont investigate civil matters right?

Unless, you think there I no FBI investigation going on?

You are aware of the FBI investigation right?

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on August 18, 2015, 11:28:53 AM
*sigh*

The FBI is not investigating Clinton. You understand that report was corrected, right?

The FBI is looking into the path of certain documents, that were not classified correctly, at the State Dep't.

Shorter version- the issue would not be whether or not Clinton herself did it incorrectly, it would be whether or not the documents should have been classified to begin with.

Now, I understand you enjoy your breathless "But she's Nixon," reporting. I don't really care for her myself. But given your postings, you will have to excuse me if I find you, well, not credible.

You'll have to be even more understanding when I say that you seem to have acquired POO (politically-obtained obtuseness) when it comes to reading. There is a difference between saying that my opinions have not changed, but they might change *if* a major Democratic player enters the field (because that would mean that there is actual currency to the issue beside your fevered imagination), as opposed to "hedging my bets." This is no different that if I were to say, "My opinion has not changed, but if Clinton was to die, I doubt she will be President."
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 18, 2015, 03:24:00 PM
I'll follow up later.  Not sure why you dont find me credible? Or incredible for that matter.  This isn't spin or partisanship playing because we are talking an actual federal criminal investigation not bridgegate...lol
 
Yes, i think Bernie will win nh and Iowa---is that partisanship? Seriously? Is it?

I'll follow up later on but here is something factual and tangible-- not spin.   
 
Check this out future lawyers --   
FBI IS investigating Hillary Clinton and this is part of what she faces.
18 USC 798 and 18 USC 1924
Nixon shooting himself  in the foot was political theatre and today, perhaps by the end of the month we will have witnessed some awesome political theatre as Clinton goes down.
 

Come on guys perhaps I'm cynical but just dont want to admit that Clinton downfall is more engaging than trumps clownshow?
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on August 18, 2015, 05:08:05 PM
I don't think the FBI is actually investigating her, per se. They're looking in to the security of the State Depts overall systems.

Nonetheless, it contributes to a general feeling of discontent and mistrust among many Democrats which could eventually hurt her. It depends on many variables.

At this point, there is no reason to believe Sanders will win Iowa. New Hampshire yes, but not Iowa. Long term, I don't think Sanders is a serious threat to Clinton's ability to obtain the nomination. The excitement over Sanders does, however, indicate that many Democrats are happy that there's an alternative to Clinton. Maybe that means lower voter turnout next November, maybe not.

The only serious threat she might face is if Biden jumps in. Chaffee and O'Malley no threat at all, but Biden has a good rep among most Democrats. He's far more likeable. 
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on August 19, 2015, 07:53:36 AM
"I'll follow up later.  Not sure why you dont find me credible? Or incredible for that matter.  This isn't spin or partisanship playing because we are talking an actual federal criminal investigation not bridgegate...lol"

Because you don't seem to get basic facts correct? Let's take this, for example. Bridgegate was an actual criminal investigation, despite your "lol." A person might reasonably disagree with how "serious" they found it, but you do realize that-
1. There was a *federal* investigation.
2. There were indictments of key Christie officials.
3. There has already been a guilty plea.

So, um, yeah. This is why I don't find your facts very credible. More importantly, though, getting back to the OP, I have followed politics long enough to not get too concerned about day-to-day. For example, the reason that Christie is doomed isn't because of bridgegate- it's because he has no GOP support- either with the establishment any more (he burned those, um, bridges) and certainly not with the base.

In an ideal world, I would prefer that Clinton not be the nominee for the Democratic party (nor would I want Sanders, who is unelectable). But I am realistic enough to know that Clinton has the support of the party establishment, and while the House GOP is doing their darnedest to leak information that they believe will damage her, it is unlikely that anyone else will get the nomination, and it is 99% certain that *no one else currently running for the nomination for the Democrats* will.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Groundhog on August 19, 2015, 06:14:28 PM
So, um, yeah. This is why I don't find your facts very credible. More importantly, though, getting back to the OP, I have followed politics long enough to not get too concerned about day-to-day. For example, the reason that Christie is doomed isn't because of bridgegate- it's because he has no GOP support- either with the establishment any more (he burned those, um, bridges) and certainly not with the base.

Would you say he burned those "tunnels" of support?
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on August 19, 2015, 09:11:43 PM
So, um, yeah. This is why I don't find your facts very credible. More importantly, though, getting back to the OP, I have followed politics long enough to not get too concerned about day-to-day. For example, the reason that Christie is doomed isn't because of bridgegate- it's because he has no GOP support- either with the establishment any more (he burned those, um, bridges) and certainly not with the base.

Would you say he burned those "tunnels" of support?
The un PC reality is no one wants someone that fat from Jersey in charge of anything outside of that area, other than maybe Waste Management.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Groundhog on August 20, 2015, 06:47:09 AM
Tbf, he isn't that fat anymore. He even looks svelte compared to an average 'murican.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on August 20, 2015, 07:16:28 AM
Would you say he burned those "tunnels" of support?

Heh. Bridge and tunnel crowd. I try not to make too much fun of New Jersey- after all, some topics are too easy.

"The un PC reality is no one wants someone that fat from Jersey in charge of anything outside of that area, other than maybe Waste Management."

Maybe. I think Christie blew his (possible) opening in 2012. He is far too liberal for the GOP base, has too many unfortunate associations, no longer has an "electable" argument, and has seriously angered parts of the establishment- he doesn't play well with other GOP figures.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on August 20, 2015, 12:55:55 PM
Tbf, he isn't that fat anymore. He even looks svelte compared to an average 'murican.
No one who vote for the "average 'murican" either.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 24, 2015, 10:53:52 PM
Oh jeez. Bridgegate Loki, fugedahbatit.  That was much ado about a traffic jam. Nothing like the belt parkway daily grind anyway.  This was about the support people screwing up and getting caught.  Federal crime ok. But not classified info.

I'm telling ya, it's gold. Check  out the usc798 & 1924.  These are about highly classified info mishandling.  You cannot say it isn't fun to watch this pan out. Ok I get it.   Trump is not as compelling at this stage of the game at least for me.   I've watched Bernie sanders smoke clinton in a state she carried.
 and at this point it's more interesting to watch this nixonesque train wreck.

Oh yeah, a sharpening of a bet with uncle joe ready to jump in the race. Maybe.

I think we see who Barak Obama gets behind is your nominee. 8)


Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 24, 2015, 11:04:17 PM
Older irish american from pennsylvania and mercurial did I say older carrying on the Obama legacy.
Hillary clinton representing the older Scranton, pennsylvania incompetent yet foreboding a pasture of an entitlement democratic establishment sheep herder straight out of Austin powers. Or some early nineties soviet tank inspector.
Then the extremely older Jewish American New Yorker, Bernie sanders who is carrying the young and old super expanding progressive movement on his back to sell out crowds.  He is the income inequality populist.

We got straight up strange fracture.

Or will hillary become the champion of the Obama legacy and Biden carries the working class vote? Who is to tell at this point?

Republican clowns how group is actually greater than typical with one pt Barnum running.
Oh yeah and the diversity of the large group. Not homogenous as dem dems.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on August 25, 2015, 07:12:24 AM
Cinnamon-

I think that you misunderstand the valence of the issues. For example, you and I might agree that "bridgegate" is no big deal (people affected might disagree), but it was a investigated and prosecuted by the US-A and resulted in guilty pleas.

On the other hand, you can speculate all you want about the email server, but to date it isn't an issue that will result in an offense. Nor will it. On the other hand, it is an issue that could prove to be politically damaging.

I understand you think it's fun to watch it- and more power to you. But it can be easy to lose sight of the forest for the trees. :)
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 25, 2015, 01:49:11 PM
"Nor will it."

This is what makes no sense.  Mishandling of classified info shouldn't be difficult to grasp; we are just waiting to see in what manner this is prosecuted.  Lets see what the FBI has to say when its done with its investigation.  I guess loki, you already know what they will find.  Amazing.

John Deutsch and sandy Berger compromised classified emails and were just as sloppy as Clinton.  Their cases began with an FBI investigation. The similarities particularly of the former with Clinton's situation are remarkable.

Neither though, had their own unprotected home server.

I guess I dont understand why you don't even see the possibility that Clinton mishandled classified info. Which is a serious crime.  If you could explain why you are so sure she did nothing illegal I think it would explain your point. Do you just feel that she is telling the truth? Help me out.

You must have thought it was strange when they began their investigation since Clinton did nothing wrong.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on August 25, 2015, 02:28:13 PM
*sigh*

"Mishandling of classified info shouldn't be difficult to grasp; we are just waiting to see in what manner this is prosecuted. "

Tell you what Cinnamon. We'll make a little bet- if they prosecute Clinton (or if she accepts any sort of deal that isn't some de minimis arrangment), then I will post "Cinnamon is right, and a political savant."

If not, then you will post, "Loki13 was right, and a political savant."

Loser doesn't get to post about politics again. We will give it, what, a four month time frame? Say, Christmas? One of will get a Christmas present. Sound good?
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on August 25, 2015, 02:43:08 PM
But, fwiw, I neither know, nor care, if Clinton is telling the truth, or did something wrong.

You seem to place great valence on certain issues, no doubt influenced by your priors. I could care less. Clinton is not my preferred candidate. I just make Bayesian predictions. That's why I still think that Clinton will be the Democratic nominee - not because I support her, but because I know that Sander and O'Malley will never win the primaries, and no one else has (yet) announced their candidacy, and the Clinton, to date, has gone far past anyone else in the invisible primary. Also? Most voters aren't paying attention right now, so while you might care deeply, unless something real develops (which is unlikely) this will just be considered more partisan smoke- people who don't like her will continue to not like her, people who do like her will think it's a partisan witchhunt, and people in the middle (all three of them) won't be able to tease out the details a year from now.

Based upon what I know, I find it exceptionally unlikely that this will amount to anything. In addition, you have misinterpreted the facts to date (IMO). That doesn't mean you can't be right. Anything can happen. Maybe there will be some smoking gun. Maybe the constant "drip drip" of revelation will erode Clinton's support and cause her to drop out of the race. But I doubt it- and I find wagers tend to clarify matters.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on August 25, 2015, 07:20:57 PM
Cin seems to have "should" confused with "will"

I remember a kid I grew up with telling me once when another kid threatened to kill him "He CANT do that" "what?" "He'd go to jail, so he CAN"T, this isn't some movie, this is REAL LIFE, get a clue!!!!"  (I almost felt the need to pop popcorn and get a rain coat and goggles to sit in the front row for the show)

The kid lived, and no doubt thought that "proof" of his theory, but it blows my mind to this day. Prison is filled with murderers but Ted Kennedy wasn't sharing a cell with anyone of them. Nor will Hillary.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on August 25, 2015, 07:22:31 PM
But, fwiw, I neither know, nor care, if Clinton is telling the truth, or did something wrong.

You seem to place great valence on certain issues, no doubt influenced by your priors. I could care less. Clinton is not my preferred candidate. I just make Bayesian predictions. That's why I still think that Clinton will be the Democratic nominee - not because I support her, but because I know that Sander and O'Malley will never win the primaries, and no one else has (yet) announced their candidacy, and the Clinton, to date, has gone far past anyone else in the invisible primary. Also? Most voters aren't paying attention right now, so while you might care deeply, unless something real develops (which is unlikely) this will just be considered more partisan smoke- people who don't like her will continue to not like her, people who do like her will think it's a partisan witchhunt, and people in the middle (all three of them) won't be able to tease out the details a year from now.

Based upon what I know, I find it exceptionally unlikely that this will amount to anything. In addition, you have misinterpreted the facts to date (IMO). That doesn't mean you can't be right. Anything can happen. Maybe there will be some smoking gun. Maybe the constant "drip drip" of revelation will erode Clinton's support and cause her to drop out of the race. But I doubt it- and I find wagers tend to clarify matters.
Loki, you know how much I HATE the idea the agreeing with you, even remotely, on anything, but also factor in that this guy already claims to not only know what WILL happen in the future but what DID happen in the past. He was there I guess??? So much for due process. A Republican said she did it. She must have done it.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Citylaw on August 26, 2015, 11:32:28 AM
What is more real Politics or Pro Wrestling?

In both you scream as loudly and taunt the other, but then put on a fake show and don't actually do anything.

To summarize why does anyone care anymore about Politics than who the current WWE champ is?
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Groundhog on August 26, 2015, 11:55:07 AM
Maybe because politics elects executive regulatory and legislative lawmakers, plus the ultimate lawmakers, SCOTUS.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Citylaw on August 26, 2015, 12:37:16 PM
Any of them are competent enough to figure out the basics Hillary, Jeb, and then maybe 2024 we will have Chelseas Clinton and Jenna Bush go at it.

If Romney was the President right now I would more likely than not be doing exactly the same thing he was fine, Obama is fine, etc.

Just like any pro wrestler can do a body-slam I don't know who the WWE champ is, but I am sure he can bench over 300 lbs.

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Groundhog on August 26, 2015, 01:21:38 PM
Uhh... What?
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Citylaw on August 26, 2015, 02:04:03 PM
Made an analogy that didn't make a much sense and not surprisingly my bad analogy is confusing.

So my point if I you even really want to call it that is that people get really worked up about Politics for no reason. In my opinion anyone seriously running for office "I don't consider Trump" a serious candidate is capable of doing a fine job. Hilary Clinton is smart and politically savy, Jeb Bush is as well, Obama is as well, I could go on and on, but any serious candiate for office will do a fine job. Sure you might prefer one over the other, but despite what Fox News says about Democrats and MSNBC says about Republicans the world will likely be fine. I.E. had Romney been elected President (There would still be problems in the Middle East, Stocks would go down/up, on and on, you would pay income tax maybe a little less under Romney, but deal with a few more societal problems or pay a little more to have a few less societal problems.)  So essentially if anyone with the possible exception of Trump, wins the election I am sure we will all be able to rant on LSD and go about our lives. Therefore, I don't understand why anyone cares that much about politics.

The point about wrestling is that they are huge and strong and whoever the champion is right now can probalby bench 300lbs and the next one will be able to as well. Just as Obama is smart we all survived, George W. is smart and we all survived, Clinton was smart we all survived, Bush #1 is smart and we all survived, Reagan on and on. They all made both good and bad decisions, but at the end of the day whoever is the Politican will not impact our lives as much as people think.

See South Park Episode when Obama wins the Presidency and everyones problems are not fixed.



Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on August 26, 2015, 08:33:19 PM
THIS is a better south park example of politics IMHO

http://www.watch-tvseries.net/series32/SOUTH-PARK/season-11-episode-05-Fantastic-Easter-Special

We should apply this to America.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 28, 2015, 03:18:46 PM
Lok,

I'm not wagering anything (I dont think that would be fair to you) but the details of the wager sound interesting.

You do at least acknowledge that basically anything can happen. Perhaps the world will end tomorrow, as we know it.  You even NOW recognize that she could be prosecuted. Good.

Look, Lok---this is already a prima facie case.  This is already out of the barn simply on the sheer facts of the case. 

Whether you want to recognize that this is historically significant it is popcorn popping ready made and enjoyable, prima facie enjoyable.

And it will come down to 18usc 793.

I dont think your belief that the new York times debunking this criminal case holds water. Because the FBI has confirmed illegal activity with regard to Hillary Clinton's government correspondence.

Remember the Republican establishment was going ahead full steam until the FBI concluded its " security investigations" of Richard Nixon.  You should see what those odds that he would win again.  2 to 1.

Like you say Clinton is a sure thing to lock down the nomination right up until she isn't. ;)

Such fun, lok right?  More fun than the Donald's antics because this stuff matters right now.  The Donald's gonna be around for a while.  Clinton's time is nigh.

I love the banter, man.



Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 28, 2015, 03:23:24 PM
Cin seems to have "should" confused with "will"

I remember a kid I grew up with telling me once when another kid threatened to kill him "He CANT do that" "what?" "He'd go to jail, so he CAN"T, this isn't some movie, this is REAL LIFE, get a clue!!!!"  (I almost felt the need to pop popcorn and get a rain coat and goggles to sit in the front row for the show)

The kid lived, and no doubt thought that "proof" of his theory, but it blows my mind to this day. Prison is filled with murderers but Ted Kennedy wasn't sharing a cell with anyone of them. Nor will Hillary.

Kids make all kinds of promises they can't keep.  You are right about real life. FBI on your ass is as real as it gets.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 28, 2015, 03:36:20 PM
But, fwiw, I neither know, nor care, if Clinton is telling the truth, or did something wrong.

You seem to place great valence on certain issues, no doubt influenced by your priors. I could care less. Clinton is not my preferred candidate. I just make Bayesian predictions. That's why I still think that Clinton will be the Democratic nominee - not because I support her, but because I know that Sander and O'Malley will never win the primaries, and no one else has (yet) announced their candidacy, and the Clinton, to date, has gone far past anyone else in the invisible primary. Also? Most voters aren't paying attention right now, so while you might care deeply, unless something real develops (which is unlikely) this will just be considered more partisan smoke- people who don't like her will continue to not like her, people who do like her will think it's a partisan witchhunt, and people in the middle (all three of them) won't be able to tease out the details a year from now.

Based upon what I know, I find it exceptionally unlikely that this will amount to anything. In addition, you have misinterpreted the facts to date (IMO). That doesn't mean you can't be right. Anything can happen. Maybe there will be some smoking gun. Maybe the constant "drip drip" of revelation will erode Clinton's support and cause her to drop out of the race. But I doubt it- and I find wagers tend to clarify matters.
Loki, you know how much I HATE the idea the agreeing with you, even remotely, on anything, but also factor in that this guy already claims to not only know what WILL happen in the future but what DID happen in the past. He was there I guess??? So much for due process. A Republican said she did it. She must have done it.


Lol if a Republican said Clinton did it then she did it?  Really? What if 2 of Obama's inspectors general said she did it then referred it to the FBI?  Then the FBI has to investigate it and finds 18 USC 793 and maybe 1943 has been broken? 

Can we assume on prima facie that Hillary Clinton might have commuted a felony or the FBI is on a partisan witchunt?

Because shucks, golly gee those 'publicans are so powerful they got Obama, his inspectors general and the FBI doing the bidding. 

And btw Hillary is going through due process right now.  Lets see if it ends up being a felony .  She's probably clean like bill Cosby.  Or was his due process squashed like Clinton?

Just sayin. 
Perhaps I'm jumping the gun but what the hell. Clinton is toast, like Nixon was toast.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on August 28, 2015, 06:44:14 PM

this is already a prima facie case. 
I honestly don't think you know what that word means
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on August 28, 2015, 06:45:52 PM
Cin seems to have "should" confused with "will"

I remember a kid I grew up with telling me once when another kid threatened to kill him "He CANT do that" "what?" "He'd go to jail, so he CAN"T, this isn't some movie, this is REAL LIFE, get a clue!!!!"  (I almost felt the need to pop popcorn and get a rain coat and goggles to sit in the front row for the show)

The kid lived, and no doubt thought that "proof" of his theory, but it blows my mind to this day. Prison is filled with murderers but Ted Kennedy wasn't sharing a cell with anyone of them. Nor will Hillary.

Kids make all kinds of promises they can't keep.  You are right about real life. FBI on your ass is as real as it gets.
The entire point of my post went right over your head
as does the concept of the FBI and what their investigation actually is and what it means. Honestly, did you even take 1L yet? Do you have any clue what due process is or how it works? At all??
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on August 28, 2015, 06:48:15 PM
But, fwiw, I neither know, nor care, if Clinton is telling the truth, or did something wrong.

You seem to place great valence on certain issues, no doubt influenced by your priors. I could care less. Clinton is not my preferred candidate. I just make Bayesian predictions. That's why I still think that Clinton will be the Democratic nominee - not because I support her, but because I know that Sander and O'Malley will never win the primaries, and no one else has (yet) announced their candidacy, and the Clinton, to date, has gone far past anyone else in the invisible primary. Also? Most voters aren't paying attention right now, so while you might care deeply, unless something real develops (which is unlikely) this will just be considered more partisan smoke- people who don't like her will continue to not like her, people who do like her will think it's a partisan witchhunt, and people in the middle (all three of them) won't be able to tease out the details a year from now.

Based upon what I know, I find it exceptionally unlikely that this will amount to anything. In addition, you have misinterpreted the facts to date (IMO). That doesn't mean you can't be right. Anything can happen. Maybe there will be some smoking gun. Maybe the constant "drip drip" of revelation will erode Clinton's support and cause her to drop out of the race. But I doubt it- and I find wagers tend to clarify matters.
Loki, you know how much I HATE the idea the agreeing with you, even remotely, on anything, but also factor in that this guy already claims to not only know what WILL happen in the future but what DID happen in the past. He was there I guess??? So much for due process. A Republican said she did it. She must have done it.



Can we assume on prima facie
 
No..............on anything............honestly, look words up before using them.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 28, 2015, 09:12:50 PM
Cin seems to have "should" confused with "will"

I remember a kid I grew up with telling me once when another kid threatened to kill him "He CANT do that" "what?" "He'd go to jail, so he CAN"T, this isn't some movie, this is REAL LIFE, get a clue!!!!"  (I almost felt the need to pop popcorn and get a rain coat and goggles to sit in the front row for the show)

The kid lived, and no doubt thought that "proof" of his theory, but it blows my mind to this day. Prison is filled with murderers but Ted Kennedy wasn't sharing a cell with anyone of them. Nor will Hillary.

Kids make all kinds of promises they can't keep.  You are right about real life. FBI on your ass is as real as it gets.
The entire point of my post went right over your head
as does the concept of the FBI and what their investigation actually is and what it means. Honestly, did you even take 1L yet? Do you have any clue what due process is or how it works? At all??

Based on the plain language of the federal statute hillary clinton committed a crime, ok?  On the basis of known facts she violated the law, understand? Hillary clinton was "gathering, transmitting and/or losing defense information"  She did this knowingly and actively utilizing her personal email and personal server.  You can review it under  u.s. code 793 check out e. and f. 


If I don't write in Latin can you still grasp some comprehension or are you just an insecure troll?

perhaps I was a tad facetious, regarding your little kid story, so sorry.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on August 29, 2015, 08:23:22 AM
I understand what you THINK you are trying to get it.
But it all rides on her DOING it. And then them being able to PROVE it.
Where you THERE? Do you know all the rules of admissible evidence?
Did you even finish 1L yet??
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 29, 2015, 12:07:49 PM
I understand what you THINK you are trying to get it.
But it all rides on her DOING it. And then them being able to PROVE it.
Where you THERE? Do you know all the rules of admissible evidence?
Did you even finish 1L yet??

Her emails, her missing emails discovered in blumenthals evidenced emails,her deleted emails.  Which we call proof.  The 2 inspector generals discovery of highly classified info in her emails.
The law 18 USC 793 e f.

So, my friend, upon initial examination there IS sufficient corroborating evidence  which appears to exist to support a case?  And guess what? A prosecutor is examining how this will be played out--the prosecutor took out a highly decorated General.  Dum da dum dum.

Percipio percepi perceptum.  ;)
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on August 29, 2015, 01:05:46 PM
I understand what you THINK you are trying to get it.
But it all rides on her DOING it. And then them being able to PROVE it.
Where you THERE? Do you know all the rules of admissible evidence?
Did you even finish 1L yet??

Her emails, her missing emails discovered in blumenthals evidenced emails,her deleted emails.  Which we call proof.  The 2 inspector generals discovery of highly classified info in her emails.
The law 18 USC 793 e f.

So, my friend, upon initial examination there IS sufficient corroborating evidence  which appears to exist to support a case?  And guess what? A prosecutor is examining how this will be played out--the prosecutor took out a highly decorated General.  Dum da dum dum.

Percipio percepi perceptum.  ;)
inferences are not convictions.

I am not saying that a jury couldn't (in theory) decide that was enough to be circumstantial evidence and convict on it, but that is all dependent on it even going to trial (it most likely won't-learn about how politics work) and even then, even if convicted, your Nixon comparison is horrible since he was never convicted and left of his own free will. Bill was convicted, rode out his term, and would have been re-elected again but for term limits.

I know you THINK you are smart, but everything you post just keeps showing more and more how you only think so.

And stop female private part footing around it, you complete 1L yet or not??
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 30, 2015, 07:28:46 PM
I understand what you THINK you are trying to get it.
But it all rides on her DOING it. And then them being able to PROVE it.
Where you THERE? Do you know all the rules of admissible evidence?
Did you even finish 1L yet??

Her emails, her missing emails discovered in blumenthals evidenced emails,her deleted emails.  Which we call proof.  The 2 inspector generals discovery of highly classified info in her emails.
The law 18 USC 793 e f.

So, my friend, upon initial examination there IS sufficient corroborating evidence  which appears to exist to support a case?  And guess what? A prosecutor is examining how this will be played out--the prosecutor took out a highly decorated General.  Dum da dum dum.

Percipio percepi perceptum.  ;)
inferences are not convictions.

I am not saying that a jury couldn't (in theory) decide that was enough to be circumstantial evidence and convict on it, but that is all dependent on it even going to trial (it most likely won't-learn about how politics work) and even then, even if convicted, your Nixon comparison is horrible since he was never convicted and left of his own free will. Bill was convicted, rode out his term, and would have been re-elected again but for term limits.

I know you THINK you are smart, but everything you post just keeps showing more and more how you only think so.

And stop female private part footing around it, you complete 1L yet or not??

Yawn,

Pardon, but I know nixon wasn't tried nor convicted. Not the point, either.  But he could have been put on trial.

Vos sumo non intelligere.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on August 31, 2015, 09:07:25 AM

Yawn,

Pardon, but I know nixon wasn't tried nor convicted. Not the point, either.  But he could have been put on trial.

Vos sumo non intelligere.

Cinnamon,

I think that you are failing to understand. You seem outrage and/or entertained. There's only one problem- when everything is an outrage, nothing is. When we can add -gate to every controversy (quick- are you a Brady supporter or hater), then who cares? More importantly, when everything devolves into an undifferentiated mass of "Benghazi / Fast & Furious / Vince Foster / Whitewater / Birth Certificate / Lois Lerner / Unprecedented Executive Power / NSA / whatevs" then people tune out. They tune out even more when the stakes seem so ... petty and small.

More importantly, you make the common mistake of believing that other people care *the exact way* that you care. First, the people that care the same way you care is small. Second, there is another, equally small, portion of people that care an equal, but opposite, direction as you do. Finally, the vast majority of people *don't care.* The can't name the Supreme Court justices, are hard pressed to name their own (federal) Senators, and haven't a prayer of naming their own state legislators ... let alone the ones outside of their district. That's fine- they have better things to do- watch football, make money, play with their children. They will probably start tuning into the election, kinda, sometime next year.

But, sure, the keyboard commandos will have fun. One side will say, "But, but, but, X person violated the law." And one side will say, "Partisan witchhunt." And 99% of the time, it's just background noise. Guess what? Nothing will happen, people will move on, and one side will vaguely remember a partisan witchhunt, and one side will vaguely remember that Hillary Clinton broke the law and got away with it. But most people just won't care, except for the influx of stupid ads during the election.

Same as it ever was. Does that mean nothing will happen this time? I don't know for sure- unlike you, I don't make dramatic and certain pronouncements. But I make probabilistic (Bayesian) assessments based on what I know, and I'm willing to back them up. You? Eh.... It seems you're not as confident in your ability to predict. Because something tells me that deep down, you enjoy making big statements, but fear that like Charlie Brown and Lucy, you've been sold a false of goods. That you're very excited to kick that football, but .... well, you should know enough by now to know you'll end up on your behind.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on August 31, 2015, 08:58:41 PM

Yawn,

Pardon, but I know nixon wasn't tried nor convicted. Not the point, either.  But he could have been put on trial.

Vos sumo non intelligere.

Cinnamon,

I think that you are failing to understand. You seem outrage and/or entertained. There's only one problem- when everything is an outrage, nothing is. When we can add -gate to every controversy (quick- are you a Brady supporter or hater), then who cares? More importantly, when everything devolves into an undifferentiated mass of "Benghazi / Fast & Furious / Vince Foster / Whitewater / Birth Certificate / Lois Lerner / Unprecedented Executive Power / NSA / whatevs" then people tune out. They tune out even more when the stakes seem so ... petty and small.

More importantly, you make the common mistake of believing that other people care *the exact way* that you care. First, the people that care the same way you care is small. Second, there is another, equally small, portion of people that care an equal, but opposite, direction as you do. Finally, the vast majority of people *don't care.* The can't name the Supreme Court justices, are hard pressed to name their own (federal) Senators, and haven't a prayer of naming their own state legislators ... let alone the ones outside of their district. That's fine- they have better things to do- watch football, make money, play with their children. They will probably start tuning into the election, kinda, sometime next year.

But, sure, the keyboard commandos will have fun. One side will say, "But, but, but, X person violated the law." And one side will say, "Partisan witchhunt." And 99% of the time, it's just background noise. Guess what? Nothing will happen, people will move on, and one side will vaguely remember a partisan witchhunt, and one side will vaguely remember that Hillary Clinton broke the law and got away with it. But most people just won't care, except for the influx of stupid ads during the election.

Same as it ever was. Does that mean nothing will happen this time? I don't know for sure- unlike you, I don't make dramatic and certain pronouncements. But I make probabilistic (Bayesian) assessments based on what I know, and I'm willing to back them up. You? Eh.... It seems you're not as confident in your ability to predict. Because something tells me that deep down, you enjoy making big statements, but fear that like Charlie Brown and Lucy, you've been sold a false of goods. That you're very excited to kick that football, but .... well, you should know enough by now to know you'll end up on your behind.
cyn, I see you Ann..........I see you girl

http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Ann+Coulter&Form=VQFRVP
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on September 01, 2015, 09:21:46 AM

Yawn,

Pardon, but I know nixon wasn't tried nor convicted. Not the point, either.  But he could have been put on trial.

Vos sumo non intelligere.

Cinnamon,

I think that you are failing to understand. You seem outrage and/or entertained. There's only one problem- when everything is an outrage, nothing is. When we can add -gate to every controversy (quick- are you a Brady supporter or hater), then who cares? More importantly, when everything devolves into an undifferentiated mass of "Benghazi / Fast & Furious / Vince Foster / Whitewater / Birth Certificate / Lois Lerner / Unprecedented Executive Power / NSA / whatevs" then people tune out. They tune out even more when the stakes seem so ... petty and small.

More importantly, you make the common mistake of believing that other people care *the exact way* that you care. First, the people that care the same way you care is small. Second, there is another, equally small, portion of people that care an equal, but opposite, direction as you do. Finally, the vast majority of people *don't care.* The can't name the Supreme Court justices, are hard pressed to name their own (federal) Senators, and haven't a prayer of naming their own state legislators ... let alone the ones outside of their district. That's fine- they have better things to do- watch football, make money, play with their children. They will probably start tuning into the election, kinda, sometime next year.

But, sure, the keyboard commandos will have fun. One side will say, "But, but, but, X person violated the law." And one side will say, "Partisan witchhunt." And 99% of the time, it's just background noise. Guess what? Nothing will happen, people will move on, and one side will vaguely remember a partisan witchhunt, and one side will vaguely remember that Hillary Clinton broke the law and got away with it. But most people just won't care, except for the influx of stupid ads during the election.

Same as it ever was. Does that mean nothing will happen this time? I don't know for sure- unlike you, I don't make dramatic and certain pronouncements. But I make probabilistic (Bayesian) assessments based on what I know, and I'm willing to back them up. You? Eh.... It seems you're not as confident in your ability to predict. Because something tells me that deep down, you enjoy making big statements, but fear that like Charlie Brown and Lucy, you've been sold a false of goods. That you're very excited to kick that football, but .... well, you should know enough by now to know you'll end up on your behind.

You are right 👉 this is pure entertainment. Did I forget to enlighten anyone to my delight at Hillary Clinton seriously silly folly.  Bernie sanders is now poised to win Iowa and newhampshire. His polls rise and hers falls.  Continuing to fall every single month.  The donald is a yawner to me. Too many pubs on this block at the moment. 17? 

So. I just buttered some more popcorn. Salt. Lol and I am enjoying watching partisan judges, inspectors general, Obama's doj, and the extremely partisan FBI get to the bottom of her b.s.   lmao.

So, ah yip, its enjoyable.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on September 10, 2015, 01:45:57 PM
So amazing, here's a kernel to chew on: Clinton is surely going to lose new Hampshire and today sanders is beating her in Iowa.

Not sure the nomination has gone to any candidate who hasn't won at least one of those two states...

The overly partisan FBI  still investigating her as well.

I dont know if having super delegates support you is end all be all.  I'll go with the law rather than popular opinion everytime. It makes ME money. :)
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on September 10, 2015, 02:05:05 PM
You can't "lose" a state to the other party in the primary FYI.
And as you can see, she is not getting any closer to prison.

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on September 18, 2015, 03:07:52 PM
You can't "lose" a state to the other party in the primary FYI.
And as you can see, she is not getting any closer to prison.



Sanders IS a Democrat and Hillary now could lose BOTH states to him.
Understand?
If Clinton wants the nomination she has to win at least one of them.


Tick tick tick....plead the 5th!

So f Ing enjoyable.. And wow! Carly! Now that is a great female candidate out of the bix
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on September 18, 2015, 08:36:27 PM
You can't "lose" a state to the other party in the primary FYI.
And as you can see, she is not getting any closer to prison.



Sanders IS a Democrat and Hillary now could lose BOTH states to him.
Understand?
If Clinton wants the nomination she has to win at least one of them.


Tick tick tick....plead the 5th!

So f Ing enjoyable.. And wow! Carly! Now that is a great female candidate out of the bix
He is literally so unimportant that I didn't even know what party he was. I had to google it to remember "oh, old white guy"
yeah he wont win anything.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on September 20, 2015, 08:35:22 AM
Good for you. Keep googling. It's an information treasure chest.  It's ok, people didn't know who Barack  Obama was either.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on September 20, 2015, 07:01:07 PM
Good for you. Keep googling. It's an information treasure chest.  It's ok, people didn't know who Barack  Obama was either.
I refer you to my token math formula
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on September 22, 2015, 10:19:32 AM
Sanders IS a Democrat and Hillary now could lose BOTH states to him.
Understand?
If Clinton wants the nomination she has to win at least one of them.


Tick tick tick....plead the 5th!

So f Ing enjoyable.. And wow! Carly! Now that is a great female candidate out of the bix

Sanders is definitely giving her a run for her money, but there is no evidence that he will win any primary other than New Hampshire. He is consistently 10-12 points behind in Iowa, and there is no reason to assume that will change.

Think about this: let's say he wins NH and she wins IA. Then what? Is Sanders really going to pull off winning any other primary? Which ones? South Carolina?

No, Sanders is not likely to be the candidate. His ascendency demonstrates how unhappy with Clinton many Democrats are, and perhaps points to some inherent weaknesses in her overall candidacy. Nonetheless, she still has a far superior position when it comes to funding, organization, and even polling. Even though many are unhappy with her, she will still probably be the candidate.

At this point, I guarantee that Clinton's people are far less worried about Sanders than they are about the possibility of Biden entering the race and the general election. They are praying that the Republicans nominate someone like Trump or Ted Cruz (both highly unlikely).   
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on September 22, 2015, 05:41:23 PM
He's there to "prove" that she wasn't "uncontested" and to keep a spark of hype if her "win" in the primary (vs the Mitt Romney "better than nothing" mentality that the republicans had last round)  Its all a sham for show. He might not know it. But that is part of the genius of it. You never let the gimp KNOW they are the gimp. That just isn't how the gimp show is played.

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on September 24, 2015, 10:30:09 PM
Hillary clinton is turning into crispy toast bit by bit everyday. 
Her so called campaign is tanking because of her own hubris.
She has met her match in some federal swords drawn: one the FBI the other the FOIA.

Popping a second bag of popcorn.  Donald who?

It's not too soon to say that she will NOT get the nominee nod. Nope.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on September 26, 2015, 07:45:12 PM
Her and Donald aren't even on the same ticket, and there is a 100% chance she'll get the ticket, and a 100% chance she wont get in any legal trouble, and a 100% chance Trump WONT get the Republican ticket, and a 99% chance he'll then run third party bullying his way into 3 way debates Ross Perot style.

I gotta know, whats the joke in your name? I don't get it.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on October 15, 2015, 08:47:03 PM
Oh my, name is one if things that might provocatively tickle  a thought.
So much to describe.  Here's one: What would make a good substitute in a recipe for cinnamon?


So, what section of the espionage law are we talking about that had Hillary possibly broke?


She was hilarious at the debate I mean hilarious.  I cannot wait for her meltdown press conference. And Bernie gave her a silly pass on the FBI investigation that he thinks nobody wants to hear about. Hilarious fir sure
Better than trump

Gouda flavored popcorn. Pop pop pop. Drip drip drip
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on October 16, 2015, 08:09:49 AM
Are you telling me that you think SUBSTITUTION is equate to "synonym"?

Nah. You just saw two words that you thought rhymed and put it down thinking it was somehow clever. You heard that word for the first time about a week prior to that didn't you?
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on October 16, 2015, 05:30:27 PM
I gave you one kernel to pop.  You seemed to turn it into carbon. You wrote that you didn't understand.  You already admit that you dont get it.  Ask someone else.  You can't take my cinnamon away either, but I just took some of yours. Thank you.
In the meantime relax; mull it around; I bet you'll cone up with something.  Maybe a few things.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Citylaw on October 18, 2015, 06:39:09 PM
Why does anyone care about politics?

I would bet significant sums of money that it is a race between Clinton & Bush who are both fine. They are both agreeable enough and not that crazy and will do a fine job.

Maybe Bernie Sanders or Ben Carson will somehow win, which is fine to.

You know what even if Trump wins there are balance of powers to level him out, and he is just a publicity whore I doubt he would actually do any real work if elected. So nothing good or bad would happen.

I think people care way to much about politicians, they will not solve your problems or make them any worse. Maybe some bill they pass will offer some minor assistance or it might hurt you a little, but honestly how much different would your life be if Bob Dole won in 1996? Or Gore in 2000? Kerry in 2004? McCain in 2008? Romney in 2012?

I imagine it would more or less be exactly the same. I didn't chose to attend law school, because Obama won the election in 2008, I didn't pass the bar, because Romeny lost. etc, etc.

Novus didn't win its lawsuit against Touro, because Obama was president.

Law School Discussion didn't lose all its membership to TLS, because Obama was president either. People care way to much and it is just pointless politics that will make very little impact on anyone's life.

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on October 18, 2015, 07:01:14 PM
Why does anyone care about politics?

I would bet significant sums of money that it is a race between Clinton & Bush who are both fine. They are both agreeable enough and not that crazy and will do a fine job.

Maybe Bernie Sanders or Ben Carson will somehow win, which is fine to.

You know what even if Trump wins there are balance of powers to level him out, and he is just a publicity whore I doubt he would actually do any real work if elected. So nothing good or bad would happen.

I think people care way to much about politicians, they will not solve your problems or make them any worse. Maybe some bill they pass will offer some minor assistance or it might hurt you a little, but honestly how much different would your life be if Bob Dole won in 1996? Or Gore in 2000? Kerry in 2004? McCain in 2008? Romney in 2012?

I imagine it would more or less be exactly the same. I didn't chose to attend law school, because Obama won the election in 2008, I didn't pass the bar, because Romeny lost. etc, etc.

Novus didn't win its lawsuit against Touro, because Obama was president.

Law School Discussion didn't lose all its membership to TLS, because Obama was president either. People care way to much and it is just pointless politics that will make very little impact on anyone's life.
I wonder how many jews made that statement right before Hitler got elected? Honestly. I bet a lot.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on October 19, 2015, 07:35:22 AM
Glad you took that last post of yours down.

Btw....biden getting ready to make a move. Yea or nay?
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on October 19, 2015, 07:18:07 PM
Glad you took that last post of yours down.

Btw....biden getting ready to make a move. Yea or nay?

shutup child....................ther e happy. Go back to pretending to be an adult somewhere else.
You never even went to undergrad-seriously Admin BAN this troll. Its useless.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on October 19, 2015, 10:21:08 PM
Glad you took that last post of yours down.

Btw....biden getting ready to make a move. Yea or nay?

shutup child....................ther e happy. Go back to pretending to be an adult somewhere else.
You never even went to undergrad-seriously Admin BAN this troll. Its useless.


Dude, you really are losing it.  You don't seem to be friendly in the slightest? You make remarks about tokenism and hitler and you want me banned? Ok, yeah you sound pretty normal????

You are causing your own angst, my man.

Try to be nicer and understand that this political season we have a genuine fbi investigation into one of the candidates.  It hasn't been this entertaining since richard nixon was plugging for the presidency and his private emails (tapes)were discovered.  You have to at least understand that a cynical political wonk like myself finds this vastly, excruciatingly funny.

So, Biden gets in maybe this week? And hillary has to face the benghazi committee.  Political theatre at its finest.  I'm taping that shitt of sho'.   Not DVD, mind you. Tape, for slow rewind when she's caught in a Pinocchio binge.

Lots of popcorn.  And yes, butter.  Again.



Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on October 19, 2015, 10:32:18 PM
Why does anyone care about politics?

I would bet significant sums of money that it is a race between Clinton & Bush who are both fine. They are both agreeable enough and not that crazy and will do a fine job.

Maybe Bernie Sanders or Ben Carson will somehow win, which is fine to.

You know what even if Trump wins there are balance of powers to level him out, and he is just a publicity whore I doubt he would actually do any real work if elected. So nothing good or bad would happen.

I think people care way to much about politicians, they will not solve your problems or make them any worse. Maybe some bill they pass will offer some minor assistance or it might hurt you a little, but honestly how much different would your life be if Bob Dole won in 1996? Or Gore in 2000? Kerry in 2004? McCain in 2008? Romney in 2012?

I imagine it would more or less be exactly the same. I didn't chose to attend law school, because Obama won the election in 2008, I didn't pass the bar, because Romeny lost. etc, etc.

Novus didn't win its lawsuit against Touro, because Obama was president.

Law School Discussion didn't lose all its membership to TLS, because Obama was president either. People care way to much and it is just pointless politics that will make very little impact on anyone's life.

I fully admit I am a cynical political wonk and I love this stuff.  Particularly when a corrupt politician falls from their sense of highmindedness and entitlement.

Watching clinton go down is awesome.  She deserves all the wheat she sowed.

I think Carson could do it if he debates better but Fiorina and Rubio will probably be there in the end.  Then Biden and Bernie.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Citylaw on October 20, 2015, 10:18:23 AM
Yea more power to you if you enjoy politics great, plenty of people do.

To me personally it has about as much merit as the Kardashians, Pardon the Interruption (My favorite show two guys rambling about sports) or some other random form of entertainment.

I honestly think everyone running is capable of doing a fine job and at the end of the day with all our checks & balances it will not make much difference who wins.

The day we are not allowed to female dog & moan about politicians or any of the Bill of Rights are infringed, which is happening at Guantanamo Bay we are fine.

The only thing I actually care about politically related is GITMO, because throwing people in jail without any actual charges or a trial on an island in Cuba violates the Bill of Rights.

Other than that common-sense will prevail. People can female dog about taxes, abortion, healthcare whatever, but people can talk about those things and make changes. A politician is not necessary if enough people want something to change it well.


Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on October 23, 2015, 07:02:52 AM
Glad you took that last post of yours down.

Btw....biden getting ready to make a move. Yea or nay?

shutup child....................ther e happy. Go back to pretending to be an adult somewhere else.
You never even went to undergrad-seriously Admin BAN this troll. Its useless.


Dude, you really are losing it.  You don't seem to be friendly in the slightest? You make remarks about tokenism and hitler and you want me banned? Ok, yeah you sound pretty normal????

You are causing your own angst, my man.

Try to be nicer and understand that this political season we have a genuine fbi investigation into one of the candidates.  It hasn't been this entertaining since richard nixon was plugging for the presidency and his private emails (tapes)were discovered.  You have to at least understand that a cynical political wonk like myself finds this vastly, excruciatingly funny.

So, Biden gets in maybe this week? And hillary has to face the benghazi committee.  Political theatre at its finest.  I'm taping that shitt of sho'.   Not DVD, mind you. Tape, for slow rewind when she's caught in a Pinocchio binge.

Lots of popcorn.  And yes, butter.  Again.

I will briefly note, as I have previously, that it is important to separate desired outcomes from facts. For example, there is no FBI investigation of any candidate. But you knew this. Biden did not enter the race. And while the Benghazi committee certainly warranted popcorn, it likely wasn't for the reasons you hoped.

Any way, the sun will rise, the sun will set, and we will have an election next year.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on October 23, 2015, 07:03:12 PM
Just in case you haven't seen it yet........enjoy.
http://www.smosh.com/videos/if-kanye-were-president-2957392
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on October 24, 2015, 09:29:29 AM
Benghazi hearing, a mild and sad political drama.
I got more for later on that sour display.

In the meantime getting back to more important information I recall what
Mr. James Comey said to the chairman of the J.C.

Mr. Chairman, I respectfully say that one I’m not going to comment on. As you know the FBI is working on a referral given to us by Inspectors General in connection with former Secretary Clinton’s use of a private email server. As you also know about the FBI, we don’t talk about our investigations while we do them. This is one I’m following very closely and get briefed on regularly.”

This is goooood stuff. I'm following it closely too, Mr. Comey.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on October 24, 2015, 11:51:49 AM
Benghazi hearing, a mild and sad political drama.
I got more for later on that sour display.

In the meantime getting back to more important information I recall what
Mr. James Comey said to the chairman of the J.C.

Mr. Chairman, I respectfully say that one I’m not going to comment on. As you know the FBI is working on a referral given to us by Inspectors General in connection with former Secretary Clinton’s use of a private email server. As you also know about the FBI, we don’t talk about our investigations while we do them. This is one I’m following very closely and get briefed on regularly.”

This is goooood stuff. I'm following it closely too, Mr. Comey.

I'm not sure how many football it will take, Charlie Brown, but keep on kicking. I will, again, point out that you have been repeatedly, and objectively, wrong about the fact which are pointed out. And you suppositions which are based on your desires (for example, that Biden will run, that this testimony would be awesome and popcorn-worthy) don't pan out.

At some point, you might want to ask yourself why. At a certain point, it's best not to blame others for fleecing you repeatedly- you have to ask yourself why you are so susceptible to being fleeced.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on October 26, 2015, 07:30:33 AM
Here, my man. Investigations by FBI are not partisan. We independents seriously follow potential criminal wrongdoing.

Lets recap folks.

When asked by Chairman Robert Goodlatte of Judiciary Committee
Do you also believe a foreign intelligence agency, particularly an adversary could benefit from acquiring and exploiting sensitive and classified information about top level US government officials?”

Comey responded,


"Mr. Chairman, I respectfully say that one I’m not going to comment on. As you know the FBI is working on a referral given to us by Inspectors General in connection with former Secretary Clinton’s use of a private email server. As you also know about the FBI, we don’t talk about our investigations while we do them. This is one I’m following very closely and get briefed on regularly."
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on October 26, 2015, 07:39:12 AM
Lmao.

So, where am I wrong again?

Unless you csn prove the FBI are in holloween costumes concealing that they are really Republicans I will continue to enjoy the show.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on October 26, 2015, 10:12:27 AM
Lmao.

So, where am I wrong again?

Unless you csn prove the FBI are in holloween costumes concealing that they are really Republicans I will continue to enjoy the show.

I think it would be better to ask- where have you been right? You do understand, don't you, that every single one of your statements (pretty much) has been incorrect. Whether it has been a political prediction (fireworks at the Benghazi hearing! Biden will enter the race!) or whether it has been a factual recounting of events (didn't understand that the only candidate that was really under personal investigation had been Christie, didn't know the correct appellation of AUSAs, etc.).

I suggest, in the future, that you stop eating so much popcorn, and start trying to understand things independently of a) what you want to be true, and b) what people keep telling you is true.

And finally, again, I will reiterate- if you keep getting lied to, and are eager to keep swallowing the lies, that fault isn't  with the liars- it is with you.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on October 26, 2015, 01:13:07 PM
You are really a funny one. 

If you believe that no candidate is being investigated by the FBI that is fine. 
But the fact is that James Comey, the director of the FBI is following closely  the FBI  investigation of one particular candidate who is running for president.

I bet you have no idea who that candidate is?



 I'll even  you a hint:  he said the persons name out loud and it has been quoted many times.

The FBI investigation into Nixon was very interesting to follow but I'm afraid that my interest into this present day investigation is even better.  The saga continues and it is very popcorn worthy.  And it is not going aww until the FBI finish their investigation.

Sorry to disappoint you but I just broke out the kosher salt for my popcorn.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Citylaw on October 26, 2015, 01:20:07 PM
Chemerinksy for President!

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on October 26, 2015, 10:37:49 PM
Chemerinksy for President!
Interesting choice.  Gun control?
He reminds me of an old al franken snl character.  That's a very sharp guy but I think he sees himself more as an advisor.  They have longevity in politics over a campaign junkee.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on October 27, 2015, 06:06:51 AM
You are really a funny one. 

If you believe that no candidate is being investigated by the FBI that is fine. 
But the fact is that James Comey, the director of the FBI is following closely  the FBI  investigation of one particular candidate who is running for president.


No... I'm a serious one. This was explained to you back on, inter alia, August 18. This *was* a board for legal students and want-to-be legal students. There are 0Ls, law students, and legal practitioners who used this board at one point still ghosting here.

I have no problem with your bizarre political rants and opinions- after all, it helps me know what won't happen. But please stop spreading false "facts" that you've learned from some disreputable new site. There are devoted websites for that, where other misguided people will agree with you, and then you will be shocked when nothing happens, and then forget about it the next day. Oh, I forgot, the obligatory, BENGHAZI!!11!!!! *sigh*
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on October 27, 2015, 07:36:25 AM
You are not serious. You are a fool. You don't grasp the serious FBI investigation that IS going on.  I have quoted to you how the director of the FBI is following the investigation of Hillary Clinton.  Your August 18 statement is factual incorrect but it appears you drank some propaganda koolaide. And  now you rant about about this board.  You keep bringing up Benghazi????? I dont care about Benghazi. I know Clinton lied to the mothers and fathers of those who died in the Benghazi attack.    Yes, you are dense.

Your in denial about the fbi investigation which has eaten away Clinton's credibility, particularly among independents. 
If you don't want to acknowledge this its okay.

Please, dont harass me, thank you.

So, I say to you, go home Charlie brown.  If you can recognize the interest in a nixonian politician you don't belong in this discussion. There are plenty of other topics you can discuss on lsd.

You not good when it comes to Hillary, sorry my man.

Im not joking. Do not harass me any more.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on October 27, 2015, 09:00:14 AM
If you can recognize the interest in a nixonian politician you don't belong in this discussion. There are plenty of other topics you can discuss on lsd.


Here's the funny thing- I do contribute to other conversations on LSD. And I have for years and year- pretty much since the board started. Because I did the whole "applying to law school, going to law school, working in BigLaw" type of thing. And it is my understanding that a board called "Law School Discussion" is primarily about law school, and discussions thereof.

You, near as I can tell, have only posted on this board regarding political topics. Which, you know, I suppose is fine and all, although there are probably at least one million more appropriate sites than that. That said, if you have actual substantive things to write about politics it would be nice. Instead of the same old tired things anyone can see in the comment threads of a local Idaho newspaper. In addition, when you are corrected on the legal issues you wish to bring up (which are few and far between, as opposed to your invariably incorrect "popcorn" predictions), it would be nice if you would drop them.

As was explained to you, the initial leaked reports that Clinton was being investigated were incorrect. That the FBI is conducting an investigation into the overall matter is correct, but she is not the target of an investigation; that was a retracted story. I realize that you don't have the time or energy to get these basic facts correct, even when it was explained to you over five weeks ago, but it is what it is.

And, as I explained to you before, I am not a fan of Clinton. I am not a fan of any of the people currently running. I do try to keep abreast of current events, and I do try to keep my opinions based on observable facts. You may find that you will be less disappointed with reality when you base your opinions on what is occurring, as opposed to what you want to believe.

If you want to dislike Clinton, more power to you. That's fine! Heck, if you want to rant and rave about how you dislike Clinton, go right ahead- you can certainly join others in doing so. But if you would like to use a law school discussion forum to rant and rave about politics, please expect some pushback when you are stating facts that aren't true. I will again refer you back to the prior discussion. That should've settled. I suggest going back to your popcorn.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Citylaw on October 27, 2015, 05:19:09 PM
Chewbacca for President 2016!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on October 28, 2015, 07:33:48 AM
Chewbacca for President 2016!

Chewie is fine. But I'm all in for Emperor Palpatine.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on October 28, 2015, 03:05:30 PM
I watched hillary clinton's testimony about benghazi and think that it should have been held in private and not a public session just like all of the others.  And,  get depositions privately.  This should not have been done before the cameras, since, number one it has been a bone of contention for democrats who claim that the whole thing is fabricated to make clinton look foolish or incompetent so that it affects her ability to run for office. It has been a bone of contention for Republicans in that Americans had been killed in an attack and repeated security  requests went unattended by someone.  Also,  someone began an idiotic rumor that a YouTube video provoked an obvious, calculated military attack.

I'm an independent and some of us dont care which party is in power--- we look at the lowest common denominator.  Occam's razor, so to speak.  A. Security requests were not heeded but the system failed and perhaos not one individual is to blame.   The buck stops with the one at the top--that would be Clinton-- but she doesn't subscribe to that whole  heartedly since she still seeks higher office.  She admits to the letters and the dictionary meaning of the word "responsibility" and that is fine, too because she was not hands on responsible for the lack of security.

  But her email to her daughter marked against her words vibrating over the metal caskets of our murdered Americans into the ears of Chris Stevens mother and father and the other family members also SHAMEFULLY RESONATES with this Independent as hollow, cold, uncaring, and sinister.



I read this great article, by Ben Shapiro, which while I don't agree with all of it, the tone, however of the piece is dead on reflective of Clintons character .  More importantly he rightfully points out her disgracefully cold and disingenuous behavior and words with the brave victims families.

In another universe she might have been an effective politician but she ultimately gets in her own way.

I think like Nixon, the FBI has finally caught up with her and she'll get the restraint she needs.

By Ben Shapiro
No, it  looks like Hillary Clinton Didn't Care About Chris Stevens

Oct. 28, 2015

Last week, the media hailed Hillary Clinton's supposed political triumph at a hearing of the House Select Committee on Benghazi concerning the terrorist attack of Sept. 11, 2012 that ended in the murder of four Americans, including American ambassador to Libya, Christopher Stevens. Clinton appeared calm and collected, even as she lied repeatedly: She said that she believed a YouTube video still bore some responsibility for the terrorist attack, despite the fact that she told the Egyptian prime minister the day after the attack that the video had nothing to do with the attack; she insisted that political hack Sidney Blumenthal didn't act as an advisor, even though he routinely emailed with her about policy; she stated that she'd been transparent about her emails, although that nonsense has been rejected by the State Department.


Most of all, Clinton suggested that Stevens had been responsible for his own murder. She said that he "felt comfortable" on the ground, and that he was merely joking when he emailed about whether the Benghazi compound would be closed. "Chris Stevens had ... a really good sense of humor," Clinton laughed. "And I just see him smiling as he's typing this." Stevens' State Department team in Libya sent requests for additional security 600 times. They were rejected.

After Clinton finished lying, she went home and hung out with her entire team. She partied. "I had my whole team come over to my house and we sat around eating Indian food and drinking wine and beer," Clinton told MSNBC's Rachel Maddow. "That's what we did. It was great. ... They did a terrific job, you know, kind of being there behind me and getting me ready, and then, you know, just talk about what we're going to do next."

As an apparent afterthought, she added to Maddow, "The point is, what are we going to do both honor and the people that we lost, and try to make sure this doesn't happen again."

Chris Stevens was always an afterthought to Clinton, despite her crocodile tears at the hearing, where she complained, "I would imagine I've thought more about what happened than all of you put together. I've lost more sleep than all of you put together." She didn't give Stevens her private email address, though Blumenthal had it. She couldn't remember holding a single conversation with Stevens after he was appointed ambassador to Libya. The night of his death she sent an email with the subject line "Chris Smith," mixing up his name with that of fellow diplomat Sean Smith. She spoke to survivors only days later. The night of the attack, she didn't speak with the Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta or the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Martin Dempsey.

Clinton's aggressive case for the invasion of Libya led to the overthrow and killing of dictator Moammar Gadhafi -- an event for which Clinton was happy to take credit, laughing, "We came, we saw, he died." She then completely ignored Libya as it turned into a terrorist hellhole, because that inconvenient fact undercut her narrative of strength and purpose. Her State Department refused to grant additional security requests because doing so would have implicitly recognized the failure of her war. Then, after Stevens died, Clinton and her team lied to the American people and the families of the slain, pinning the murders on an unforeseeable YouTube video-driven attack, rather than an utterly foreseeable terrorist attack.

Clinton is a coldly manipulative, deeply ambitious politician willing to say and do anything to achieve power. She was always that person, which is why she lied to Americans from in front of the flag-draped caskets of the murdered men in Benghazi. And she is that person now, too, as she laughs and eats Indian food hours after maintaining her lies once again before the American people.

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on October 28, 2015, 05:45:35 PM
hollow, cold, uncaring, and sinister......... she laughs and eats Indian food hours

Not sure that's illegal, impressive intestinal fortitude sure, but not illegal


and mixing up peoples names isn't proof of guilt or anything other than mixing up a name. At least she didn't say she was going to defend  "our allies in the north" of Korea............
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on October 29, 2015, 07:27:01 AM
I watched hillary clinton's testimony about benghazi and think that it should have been held in private and not a public session just like all of the others.  And,  get depositions privately.  This should not have been done before the cameras, since, number one it has been a bone of contention for democrats who claim that the whole thing is fabricated to make clinton look foolish or incompetent so that it affects her ability to run for office. It has been a bone of contention for Republicans in that Americans had been killed in an attack and repeated security  requests went unattended by someone.  Also,  someone began an idiotic rumor that a YouTube video provoked an obvious, calculated military attack.

I'm an independent and some of us dont care which party is in power--- we look at the lowest common denominator.  Occam's razor, so to speak.  A. Security requests were not heeded but the system failed and perhaos not one individual is to blame.   The buck stops with the one at the top--that would be Clinton-- but she doesn't subscribe to that whole  heartedly since she still seeks higher office.  She admits to the letters and the dictionary meaning of the word "responsibility" and that is fine, too because she was not hands on responsible for the lack of security.

  But her email to her daughter marked against her words vibrating over the metal caskets of our murdered Americans into the ears of Chris Stevens mother and father and the other family members also SHAMEFULLY RESONATES with this Independent as hollow, cold, uncaring, and sinister.

Let me see. Your major point is that when you are confronted with information you don't like, your reaction is that it shouldn't have been public. I understand that cognitive dissonance is a problem we all have to face, but this may take the cake. One might just as easily observe that given the number of one-sided leaks to come from the Committee (many of which are later retracted), it is fascinating to see how poorly the public sessions go. It is also been interesting to observe that the GOP prefers to keep matters, depositions, and other issues secret. Because this has nothing to do with getting the truth- but just generating popcorn for the true believers. That's the problem with politics today.

Also, "someone" didn't start an idiotic rumor regarding the Youtube video. As you would know, if you had been following the matter, there were numerous demonstrations throughout the Middle East (check out Egypt) due to the Youtube video. It was originally believed that Benghazi was a part of that, however, the original points by the State Department explicitly stated that terrorism was a possibility- this was edited out by the CIA. This has been found by ... what, the last 11 or 12 Benghazi investigations?

I am also curious as to how you, personally, ascribe responsibility, given that the head of State doesn't micromanage every single embassy (and proto-embassy) in the World (nor should the head). Was George W. Bush responsible for Sept. 11? For anthrax? Was Clinton responsible for the prior WTC bombing? Was Reagan responsible for the death of the Marines in Lebanon? Isn't Benghazi, really, Obama's fault (heh, THANKS OBAMA!).


I read this great article, by Ben Shapiro, which while I don't agree with all of it, the tone, however of the piece is dead on reflective of Clintons character . 

You had me at Ben Shaprio. As I said before, after a while, the fault ins't with the liars- that's what they do. The fault is with the people who keep lapping up the lies. When people keep saying, "Why do we have these politicians?" the fingers they should be pointing should be directed at themselves- because you are the people that lap up what they are telling you.

Garbage in, garbage out.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on October 29, 2015, 07:53:33 AM
hollow, cold, uncaring, and sinister......... she laughs and eats Indian food hours

Not sure that's illegal, impressive intestinal fortitude sure, but not illegal


and mixing up peoples names isn't proof of guilt or anything other than mixing up a name. At least she didn't say she was going to defend  "our allies in the north" of Korea............

The attack at Benghazi was horrible and the deaths were tragic but this could potential could have been prevented if the state department had not been so disorganized with regard to security issues.  It is a systemic failure. What is cold, disingenuous and sinister is factually acknowledging to a family member in an email and a foreign government official that the attack was an organized, calculated military attack and then standing over the dead bodies with family members present and telling them that a video caused the deaths.

Do you understand?

Shapiro was expressing that after being questioned about the details of what happened doesn't say she further contemplated how we should honor the dead and find ways to prevented it from happening again-- instead she details ordering Indian food and partying with her camp.  The dead and the seriousness of the Benghazi event are an after thought to Hillary Clinton.

I see why Republicans, independents and now some democrats are done with her.  Jj
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on October 29, 2015, 08:26:29 AM
Loki,

Your pushback is partisan.  And intelligent people see through the bureaucratic bullshitt.  You have obviously drank the Democrat party talking points. You mischaracterize the FBI investigation in that you don't realize that Hillary Clinton and her own actions as well as her staff are being investigated by the FBI.  James Comey made a statement expressing how he will not comment on the investigation into Hillary Clinton's email setup.  You can't separate Hillary out of the equation.  Her emails didn't write themselves.

If you want to believe that a YouTube video was responsible for Benghazi and not some demonstration in Cairo, so be it.

I for one dont believe the bullshittt. I know now that Clinton is in deep doo doo.

So you may want to re read what you seem to believe yourself.

You are obviously a partisan Democrat talkin point guy.

I dont care who screwed up at the state department.  Maybe Clinton isn't to blame, it is a bloated bureaucratic department with system failures. Get it now loki???

Clinton knew it was an organized military attack and she boldfaced lied to the dead American families.  She blamed the event on a YouTube video but she admitted to her daughter what she truly knew.  That is a fact, not a talking point, my friend.

Have popcorn and watch the fall if a politician from grace--stop drinking the koolaide you dont even know you have been drinking.

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on October 29, 2015, 08:44:24 AM
Clintons testimony should have been private because all the others were private.  Her answers to the YouTube video questions were pathetic and it made her look like an uncaring cold human being.  It humanized her and exposed her disingenuous attitude towards other human beings.  She lied about the video, she knew it was a planned military attack and admitted as much but seems to be able to live with herself.

A private session would have spared the dead victims families the pain of watching her pathetic obfuscation and untruths.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on October 29, 2015, 02:05:43 PM
Clintons testimony should have been private because all the others were private.  Her answers to the YouTube video questions were pathetic and it made her look like an uncaring cold human being.  It humanized her and exposed her disingenuous attitude towards other human beings.  She lied about the video, she knew it was a planned military attack and admitted as much but seems to be able to live with herself.

A private session would have spared the dead victims families the pain of watching her pathetic obfuscation and untruths.

Let's try this again, what, with the basic facts and understanding.

1. "All the others were private." I realize you were born yesterday, but this is surprising. You know that there are hours, and hours, and hours of prior footage of the people that they've had before them, but you've been too uninterested to watch? You can google it! Heck, there's this thing called "Youtube" that the secretive Benghazi committee posts selected videos too. Or, if you don't have much computer knowledge, you can watch C-SPAN. Of course, since your only real point is that testimony you don't like should be secret, so as not to interfere with what you want to be true, I suppose you could have a place in Stalin's Russia.
2. Yes, it was a terrorist attack. Of course, had you paid attention to what I said, or the prior dozen or so investigations, you would have known that already. You would have already known that the State Department was going to say that this was a possibility early on, and that the CIA (not State, not the Administration) changed that. Also- it wasn't her lying. Small point, but still. Attribution is so important, isn't it?
3. As I explained to you before, I'm not partisan. I tried to explain the whole thing about polling, Bayesian predictions, and my own personal desire that facts get recounted instead of partisan BS. I'd rather Clinton didn't win- but I may end up voting for her over some of the current GOP candidates. We'll see. It's choosing between the evil of lessers. On the other hand, at least I take some small comfort in not projecting my personal "pathetic obfuscations and untruths" on to other people- so there's that, I guess.

Also? I don't seek out law discussion boards to rant about my personal and political insecurities. So I also have that working for me.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Citylaw on October 29, 2015, 02:43:43 PM
Politics!  8)

That is an awesome response Loki.

It does appear that politicians lie or manipulate the truth, which includes Hilary Clinton. I was completely shocked to learn of this as I thought politicians were well known for always making the absolute right decision and never bending the truth to keep power. I was disappointed that American political system was the first ever where power-hungry people that sought elected office bent rules and maybe even lied to both stay in power and increase their power. I am not aware of any other civilization in history where this kind of things happened or any other current country, with a similar political climate.

What will be disclosed next? Cops don't always make the right decision? Doctors make mistakes? Banks cheat people out of money? I hope none of that is true, otherwise my sense of the real world beign absolutely perfect will be forever shattered.  :'(



Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on October 29, 2015, 04:43:34 PM
hollow, cold, uncaring, and sinister......... she laughs and eats Indian food hours

Not sure that's illegal, impressive intestinal fortitude sure, but not illegal


and mixing up peoples names isn't proof of guilt or anything other than mixing up a name. At least she didn't say she was going to defend  "our allies in the north" of Korea............

The attack at Benghazi was horrible and the deaths were tragic but this could potential could have been prevented if the state department had not been so disorganized with regard to security issues.  It is a systemic failure. What is cold, disingenuous and sinister is factually acknowledging to a family member in an email and a foreign government official that the attack was an organized, calculated military attack and then standing over the dead bodies with family members present and telling them that a video caused the deaths.

Do you understand?

Shapiro was expressing that after being questioned about the details of what happened doesn't say she further contemplated how we should honor the dead and find ways to prevented it from happening again-- instead she details ordering Indian food and partying with her camp.  The dead and the seriousness of the Benghazi event are an after thought to Hillary Clinton.

I see why Republicans, independents and now some democrats are done with her.  Jj
I understand that the parts of your post that I responded to had jack to do with what you are asking if I understand. Do YOU understand? No. No you don't.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on October 29, 2015, 08:32:28 PM
hollow, cold, uncaring, and sinister......... she laughs and eats Indian food hours

Not sure that's illegal, impressive intestinal fortitude sure, but not illegal


and mixing up peoples names isn't proof of guilt or anything other than mixing up a name. At least she didn't say she was going to defend  "our allies in the north" of Korea............

The attack at Benghazi was horrible and the deaths were tragic but this could potential could have been prevented if the state department had not been so disorganized with regard to security issues.  It is a systemic failure. What is cold, disingenuous and sinister is factually acknowledging to a family member in an email and a foreign government official that the attack was an organized, calculated military attack and then standing over the dead bodies with family members present and telling them that a video caused the deaths.

Do you understand?

Shapiro was expressing that after being questioned about the details of what happened doesn't say she further contemplated how we should honor the dead and find ways to prevented it from happening again-- instead she details ordering Indian food and partying with her camp.  The dead and the seriousness of the Benghazi event are an after thought to Hillary Clinton.

I see why Republicans, independents and now some democrats are done with her.  Jj
I understand that the parts of your post that I responded to had jack to do with what you are asking if I understand. Do YOU understand? No. No you don't.

Oh, I get it you were pointing out the things that weren't illegal that mrs. Clinton did and making a joke about here constitution. Very funny. Sorry, I didn't mention it earlier. 

That's right maybe she didn't do anything illegal. Who cares, the FBI are handling Clintons litigation at the moment. That's something to make a joke about, right?

To the average independent voter who smells typically republican stupid bullshitt with Clintin its  her warped personality and ethics that have driven son of us, and continuing to drive us away from her.
She's unscrupulous maybe not legally culpable with regard to Benghazi.

So sorry if I offended you.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on October 29, 2015, 09:03:33 PM
Clintons testimony should have been private because all the others were private.  Her answers to the YouTube video questions were pathetic and it made her look like an uncaring cold human being.  It humanized her and exposed her disingenuous attitude towards other human beings.  She lied about the video, she knew it was a planned military attack and admitted as much but seems to be able to live with herself.

A private session would have spared the dead victims families the pain of watching her pathetic obfuscation and untruths.

Let's try this again, what, with the basic facts and understanding.

1. "All the others were private."Hillary requested it be public her celebrity brings tv cameras.  The other depositions were not blown out on commercial news channels. Plus, victims families got to listen to the bulkshitt all over again. Get it? I realize you were born yesterday, but this is surprising. You know that there are hours, and hours, and hours of prior footage of the people that they've had before them, but you've been too uninterested to watch?oh? I could have watched Sydney Blumenthal in real time? Missed that one. You can google it! Heck, there's this thing called "Youtube" that the secretive Benghazi committee posts selected videos too. Or, if you don't have much computer knowledge, you can watch C-SPAN. Of course, since your only real point is that testimony you don't like should be secret, so as not to interfere with what you want to be true, I suppose you could have a place in Stalin's Russia.
2. Yes, it was a terrorist attack. Of course, had you paid attention to what I said, or the prior dozen or so investigations, you would have known that already. You would have already known that the State Department was going to say that this was a possibility early on, and that the CIA (not State, not the Administration) changed that. Also- it wasn't her lying. Small point, but still. Attribution is so important, isn't it?I dont give a *&^% about the initial release by Hillary and her staff its what she said over the dead peoples dead bodies with their grieving family members. And the email to her daughter where she divulged what she truly knew.
3. As I explained to you before, I'm not partisan. I tried to explain the whole thing about polling, Bayesian predictions, and my own personal desire that facts get recounted instead of partisan I do believe that but you have a stronger lean to the democratic party because you are using their talking points.  Dont answer but think about when you last voted fir a rwpublican I'd rather Clinton didn't win- but I may end up voting for her over some of the current GOP candidates. [] We'll see. It's choosing between the evil of lessers. any candidate but trump would be the lesser of two evils. That is funnyOn the other hand, at least I take some small comfort in not projecting my personal "pathetic obfuscations and untruths" on to other people- so there's that, I guess.

Also? I don't seek out law discussion boards to rant about my personal and political insecurities. So I also have that working for me. oh, ok perhaps you don't rant but you do. But who cares. That's your style. Venting in a way and i accept it. I ginon this board because my work right after law school is  awesome but time consuming and I like to vent about  politics at this time in our election cycles 


Ask yourself this, when Clinton said that she still believes that a YouTube video might have had something to do with the attack on Benghazi do you honestly believe her?

I think you lean mostly to the left. Besides, I truly think bernie might be the only one standing in a few months. 
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on October 29, 2015, 09:09:36 PM
Random person on the internet thinks he know more about a terrorists mind than anyone else on planet earth................I'd add a smart ass emoji if it isn't so pathetic.

You don't even have a point anymore, you just let random random merge together until you THINK you have a thing worth hitting the post button over.
Remind me junior, what was your ASAB score? I 100% promise you never sat it.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on October 30, 2015, 07:47:01 AM
Random posts about internet ghosts
And jokes about posts fall flat on most
Finding fault in YouTube videos and canisters of toast
Not uranium fooled not once but twice makes Iraq and Libya
A host of miscalculated votes by a third rate politician
From Pennsylvania who boasts to her daughter and leaders of nations
That organized militants calculated the flimsy cia installation on the Benghazi coast.
Legally free to eat Indian food and laugh and toast  how to roast congress is most
Important but to family members of the deceased her internet YouTube video and Iraq war vote
Bloats and
Bleeds American blood. And obfuscation from a liary person dosed out close to the truth but really scum from the bottom of a foggy moat. Thank god she resigned her blasé blouse from the joust. Be warned trinity what rough beast cackles toward tricky male private part nixons
Ghost.

And really? I know more than anyone on the internet? Please, i know less. Don't be so bitter. Trin

What was that about asab? Trinity college Dublin, ireland scl. Lfmao

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on October 30, 2015, 09:54:44 AM
Random posts about internet ghosts
And jokes about posts fall flat on most
Finding fault in YouTube videos and canisters of toast
Not uranium fooled not once but twice makes Iraq and Libya
A host of miscalculated votes by a third rate politician
From Pennsylvania who boasts to her daughter and leaders of nations
That organized militants calculated the flimsy cia installation on the Benghazi coast.
Legally free to eat Indian food and laugh and toast  how to roast congress is most
Important but to family members of the deceased her internet YouTube video and Iraq war vote
Bloats and
Bleeds American blood. And obfuscation from a liary person dosed out close to the truth but really scum from the bottom of a foggy moat. Thank god she resigned her blasé blouse from the joust. Be warned trinity what rough beast cackles toward tricky male private part nixons
Ghost.

And really? I know more than anyone on the internet? Please, i know less. Don't be so bitter. Trin

What was that about asab? Trinity college Dublin, ireland scl. Lfmao
words just randomly roll off you to say anything BUT the topic at hand don't they?
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on October 30, 2015, 05:07:17 PM
Random posts about internet ghosts
And jokes about posts fall flat on most
Finding fault in YouTube videos and canisters of toast
Not uranium fooled not once but twice makes Iraq and Libya
A host of miscalculated votes by a third rate politician
From Pennsylvania who boasts to her daughter and leaders of nations
That organized militants calculated the flimsy cia installation on the Benghazi coast.
Legally free to eat Indian food and laugh and toast  how to roast congress is most
Important but to family members of the deceased her internet YouTube video and Iraq war vote
Bloats and
Bleeds American blood. And obfuscation from a liary person dosed out close to the truth but really scum from the bottom of a foggy moat. Thank god she resigned her blasé blouse from the joust. Be warned trinity what rough beast cackles toward tricky male private part nixons
Ghost.

And really? I know more than anyone on the internet? Please, i know less. Don't be so bitter. Trin

What was that about asab? Trinity college Dublin, ireland scl. Lfmao
words just randomly roll off you to say anything BUT the topic at hand don't they?

The poem went right over your head didn't it?
And the words I used to write it were all random, right?

Topic: POTUS? Hmm??

I like your words in this last post especially" randomly roll"  I like the fact that you used letters from the alphabet and punctuation.

Clinton's legal issues are in the hands of the FBI--negligence and incompetence with regard to handling, storing classified info. I even wrote about it in the poem.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on October 30, 2015, 05:21:12 PM
I was just wondering why would all the imaginary Joe Biden voters automatically go to Hillary Clinton?

If you have any answers to these questions, I'm sure people would love to hear your thoughts.

Some of bidens peeps might like Bernie sanders.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on October 30, 2015, 07:00:27 PM
...........and NO ONE supported Biden..............
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on October 31, 2015, 10:15:10 AM
...........and NO ONE supported Biden..............
Very funny.
Oh, ok. Thanks for your input, trin.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on November 05, 2015, 07:58:53 AM

Another drippy day for mrs. Hillary; and Bernie sanders found his moxy.

So it looks like me. Sanders is not tired of her emails after all and thinks the FBI needs to get to the bottom of her nefarious behavior.
Even better, it looks like not only are the FBI checking into gross negligence behind her personal email content and maintenance but she may get obstruction of justice added to the list of transgressions.  That darn evidence wasn't going to remain secret for long. This time around the FBI wont have to word about  " missing minutes of tape."
They got it all and her own words of deception flapping in the wind.
Walter Scott got it right, "oh, what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive!"

Cumin Salt for my popcorn today.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on November 05, 2015, 04:55:12 PM

Another drippy day.....Cumin for my popcorn......

Careful there Cin, pretty sure that's a felony in some of the more conservative states
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on November 10, 2015, 07:42:27 AM
FBI not after, Jake Sullivan, Huma Abedin, nor Cheryl Mills.

It's the one who set up the unsecure, unauthorized communications system.

Who could it be?
And its not the guy who didn't want to incriminate himself
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on November 10, 2015, 07:46:48 AM

Another drippy day.....Cumin for my popcorn......

Careful there Cin, pretty sure that's a felony in some of the more conservative states

Independents dont care about left or right states.  We call it like we see it.  Cumin is neutral.  And not a good synonym for cinnamon. Lol
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on November 10, 2015, 08:31:46 AM
If you can recognize the interest in a nixonian politician you don't belong in this discussion. There are plenty of other topics you can discuss on lsd.



As was explained to you, the initial leaked reports that Clinton was being investigated were incorrect. That the FBI is conducting an investigation into the overall matter is correct, but she is not the target of an investigation; that was a retracted story. I realize that you don't have the time or energy to get these basic facts correct, even when it was explained to you over five weeks ago, but it is what it is.



Some media outlets want to keep saying that Hillary isn’t a “target” of the investigation (a statement of fact which is at the very least out of date, and is altogether unconfirmable now.


Loki, I think you have been lied to and you believed it. I'm sorry, bro.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Citylaw1000 on November 10, 2015, 09:42:00 AM
Whoa, whoa are you alleging that a media outlet might misconstrue the facts in favor of a political candidate?

Are you also claiming that a politician might have done something less than noble? Possibly even directly lied about something?

What next are lawyers going to start arguing?

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on November 10, 2015, 01:47:38 PM
Whoa, whoa are you alleging that a media outlet might misconstrue the facts in favor of a political candidate?

Are you also claiming that a politician might have done something less than noble? Possibly even directly lied about something?

What next are lawyers going to start arguing?


Liar? Really? a politician? A newspaper?
Nope. Just the facts, m'am.

It's not the question its the cover up, the secrecy, the her story. The changing story that cops suspect.

And an attempt to destroy classified info.

Prima facie

Citylaw, most politicians lie. its the ones who everybody knows are bad liars who get caught, like Richard Nixon and Hillary Clinton who we dont give the benefit of the doubt to that make politics as interesting as a cobra mating with a mongoose.

The only doubters are Clinton supporters at this point.
It's irrelevant that mrs. Hillary's word cloud has LIAR as its foundation.

Nixon lived through it and kept the presidency, right?
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Citylaw1000 on November 10, 2015, 04:13:10 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KiIP_KDQmXs (exhibit 1)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UEmjwR0Rs20 (exhibit 2)

That should give you some fuel.

A different President with a different cover up https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R67CH-qhXJs

The point is you can get rambling responses from countless Presidents avoiding the simple answer to questions.

Politicians, stretch the truth it is part of the job and why we decide to freak out about random lies once in awhile is beyond me.

You can't be completely honest as a President, simply cannot be done Democrat-Republican whatever. However, people join the media onslaught of whatever the flavor of the week is in.

If the media wants we can spend months talking about the air-pressure in a football.

Blah blah, but why isn't there focus on a candidate's ability to effectively run the country. In my lifetime I know Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush, and Obama have lied countless times. The next President whether it is Hilary, Carson, Trump I don't even know will lie and/or stretch the truth.

That is what Politics is and it attracts people that are capable of blatantly lying. That is not necessarily even a bad thing, our great American Hero George Washington lied, cheated, killed, and committed treason to create this country.

So it just simply baffles me when everyone likes to make a spectacle on some random issue, but what is truly great about this country is you can speak your mind about the issues freely. I don't agree with you, but plenty of people will be happy to bash Hilary with you.

I will be doing something else, that you probably think is a waste of time, but as long as our right to Free Speech, Association, etc is standing let the politicians lie, cheat and steal and do some good along the way as well, it won't impact my life all that much.



Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on November 10, 2015, 10:20:44 PM
Citylaw.
I agree with you most politicians lie.  Most presidents lie.

And I'm an independent who only wants our next president to succeed

Freaking out over one Random? Or not random lie is a little extreme.

But, like I said when we get a politician like Richard Nixon or Hillary Clinton and have watched and or can watch their degeneration and demise first hand it is quite exciting. Watergate was oddly exciting.  Do you see what I mean?

Maybe I'm a bit of a cynic. Forgive me.

Oh, and I  definitely dont like it when the press makes a spectacle of sone random issue
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Citylaw1000 on November 11, 2015, 09:42:51 AM
Freaking out is an extreme tone, and not what I meant.

My point is that clearly this Hilary Benghazi issue is important to you and you do not want to see her as President. I don't have any strong feelings about her one way or the other, but you clearly cannot stand her and that is your choice.

One of the most controversial and interesting Supreme Court Decisions Citizens United v FEC centered solely around the right to fund a movie about how bad Hilary is. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC

This is the same case that people say makes corporations people, but that is a little off base, but the point is people out there do not like Hilary, others love her and others like myself could care less about Hilary.

However, keep speaking your mind that is your right.

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on November 12, 2015, 08:02:56 AM
Thanks for the link citylaw

It's the clandestine activities and actual classified info that she incompetently handled and top secret info that she tried to destroy and her actions to thwart inquiry---like Nixon that make her a liability.  Benghazi is basic incompetence and deception.

But, the polarizing candidate is a non starter for independents. Like the bushes. She admitted as much. She called Republicans her enemy. So, we, you included should be warned that with a Republican congress she would be 4 years of disaster.

Ask yourself this? Which other candidate-- sanders and Rubio, fiorina, Carson, Paul. Who has more problematic and dangerous baggage than mrs Hillary?
 
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on November 12, 2015, 08:09:33 AM
If the Russians, Chinese, al quaeda, isil hacked her system she put Americans lives in danger.  It's reckless and endangering. Understand? Not so much benghazi- democrats love bringing that one up all the time. Thankfully, There are about 5 other options.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on November 12, 2015, 01:32:58 PM
Wow!! Got some Orville Redenbacher brand popcorn


Now mrs. Hillary has potentially violated usc 18 section 1001. Mmm mmmm good.

It got Martha Stewart 5 months in the slammer.
Most of us just want her in restraints like Richard m. Nixon.

Lets have the FBI expedite this puppy.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on November 12, 2015, 01:36:04 PM
Lmao.  Donald trump exciting? Nah eat your heart out.

The real ones who are gonna be upset are democrats who contributed to her campaign.    dupes.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on November 17, 2015, 08:31:11 AM
Omg? Hillary Clinton says she got huge financial contributions from Wall St. Businesses and banks because she helped out post 911 attacks?

She made money out of the 911 tragedy.  Sad and sick. 

Forget the fbi--she's derailing herself from the general election---all on her own.

Even bill Clinton was shaking his head.

I thought mrs hillary's head was going to come off as she embarrassed herself trying to answer the question but i could not look away.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Citylaw on November 17, 2015, 09:52:19 AM
Out of curiosity of all the political misconduct, tragedy, and issues in the world today why so much focus on Hilary?

I don't particular like her myself and I don't plan on voting for her, but I don't think she is satan reincarnated either.

So I'm just curious what is about her with all the various issues going on that makes you so upset by her. More power to you for exercising your right to free speech, but I personally find it fascinating when people get so worked up about a presidential candidate, and am curious about what drives you on the issue.

I personally don't like Hilary much either, but of all the issues in the world her screw ups are not that high on my list.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on November 17, 2015, 01:12:37 PM
Out of curiosity of all the political misconduct, tragedy, and issues in the world today why so much focus on Hilary?


The entertaining, if tragic, belief that the people on this law board share his viewpoint, as opposed to viewing his political ramblings with bemused contempt, and as more appropriate fodder for a site devoted to discussing the finer details of the local dog-catcher election.

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Citylaw on November 17, 2015, 03:26:22 PM
Hilary is running for dog catcher?! : )
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on November 17, 2015, 03:56:22 PM
Out of curiosity of all the political misconduct, tragedy, and issues in the world today why so much focus on Hilary?

I don't particular like her myself and I don't plan on voting for her, but I don't think she is satan reincarnated either.

So I'm just curious what is about her with all the various issues going on that makes you so upset by her. More power to you for exercising your right to free speech, but I personally find it fascinating when people get so worked up about a presidential candidate, and am curious about what drives you on the issue.

I personally don't like Hilary much either, but of all the issues in the world her screw ups are not that high on my list.

Do u like puzzles?
I'll explain later

June 17, 1972 then July 1973
And the FBI

History repeats itself march 3, 2015 then July 24 2015
And the FBi
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on November 19, 2015, 01:56:35 PM
Out of curiosity of all the political misconduct, tragedy, and issues in the world today why so much focus on Hilary?

I don't particular like her myself and I don't plan on voting for her, but I don't think she is satan reincarnated either.

So I'm just curious what is about her with all the various issues going on that makes you so upset by her. More power to you for exercising your right to free speech, but I personally find it fascinating when people get so worked up about a presidential candidate, and am curious about what drives you on the issue.

I personally don't like Hilary much either, but of all the issues in the world her screw ups are not that high on my list.

Do u like puzzles?
I'll explain later

June 17, 1972 then July 1973
And the FBI

History repeats itself march 3, 2015 then July 24 2015
And the FBi

On June 17 1972 the Watergate breakin occurred.  He was,a shoe in to win and he was elected  as a very popular president 5 months later.  On Around July 23 1973 Nixons secret recorded communications was discovered.  He refused to let them go until the supreme court got involved.
The FBI had been investigating him and this was a fascinating time in politics

On september 11, 2012 our benghazi libya post was destroyed by an organize militia...Fast forward to march 3 2015 and we discovered Hillary Clinton had a secret communications set up if her own.  She refused to give them up until an inspector general made a reference to the justice dept.  Then on July 24th 2015 the FBI got involved.


Intriguing. and it was bad for Nixon just as it is bad for Clinton now.

Citylaw? Do you understand peoples interest in these tragically flawed politicians?

And why voting for them was a waste if time?
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on November 19, 2015, 02:00:20 PM
Hilary is running for dog catcher?! : )

Lol
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Citylaw on November 19, 2015, 02:52:38 PM
I think that actually goes to my overall point Nixon, Clinton, Bush, Obama whoever is president will have to bend the law to maintain power.

Again, George Washington was a traitorous, murder and for all intents and purposes a terrorist. America was founded on that as was basically every society in history.  George Washington and the U.S. won so he is the founding father and remembered as a remarkable person.

To become someone with great power you cannot do everything by the book. It is just literally impossible so when I hear a politician lied etc, I am not surprised nor do I necessarily think it is that big a deal.

When I hear a lawyer is arguing in a courtroom, a doctor is performing surgery, or an accountant is crunching numbers I don't make much fuss and when I hear a politician is doing everything in their power to maintain and increase their power and public image even it is not that surprising either.

That is just me and there are a lot of things I have issues with, but Hilary Clinton and Benghazi is not my big fight, but it is yours and more power to you for voicing your concerns.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on November 19, 2015, 10:00:59 PM
I think that actually goes to my overall point Nixon, Clinton, Bush, Obama whoever is president will have to bend the law to maintain power.

Again, George Washington was a traitorous, murder and for all intents and purposes a terrorist. America was founded on that as was basically every society in history.  George Washington and the U.S. won so he is the founding father and remembered as a remarkable person.

To become someone with great power you cannot do everything by the book. It is just literally impossible so when I hear a politician lied etc, I am not surprised nor do I necessarily think it is that big a deal.

When I hear a lawyer is arguing in a courtroom, a doctor is performing surgery, or an accountant is crunching numbers I don't make much fuss and when I hear a politician is doing everything in their power to maintain and increase their power and public image even it is not that surprising either.

That is just me and there are a lot of things I have issues with, but Hilary Clinton and Benghazi is not my big fight, but it is yours and more power to you for voicing your concerns.

I think you are not witnessing the difference between lying and not getting caught on the local, state level even you feel even among the presidents. Since they all do it and who cares---Than the prospect of an FBI investigation into criminal corruption with serious consequences in the balance.

The interest is in the ones who are about to get caught.

The interest in Nixon is NOT watergate its the historical aspect of a high office officials demise after an criminal FBI investigation.--and he was a popular president.

The interest in Clinton is NOT Benghazi its  her slow demise during a criminal FBI investigation while she was trying to pursue higher office.

See the difference?

I never bothered to follow an FBI investigating into Obama or Bush because it never happened, otherwise I would have found their fall from grace intriguing...get it now?
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on November 20, 2015, 12:29:08 PM
Omg? Hillary Clinton says she got huge financial contributions from Wall St. Businesses and banks because she helped out post 911 attacks?

She made money out of the 911 tragedy.  Sad and sick. 

Forget the fbi--she's derailing herself from the general election---all on her own.

Even bill Clinton was shaking his head.

I thought mrs hillary's head was going to come off as she embarrassed herself trying to answer the question but i could not look away.
you should look into the stuff Cheney did

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Citylaw on November 20, 2015, 01:21:35 PM
Cheney is on another level the day you shoot someone in the face and they apologize to you is when you have true power.  The FBI etc were just plain scared of him.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILqnYx7XnwQ




Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on November 21, 2015, 01:07:53 PM
Cheney is on another level the day you shoot someone in the face and they apologize to you is when you have true power.  The FBI etc were just plain scared of him.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILqnYx7XnwQ
That yes, plus the money he made off of Halliburton during the wars
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on November 23, 2015, 08:53:43 PM
Cheney is on another level the day you shoot someone in the face and they apologize to you is when you have true power.  The FBI etc were just plain scared of him.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILqnYx7XnwQ

While Cheney was a surreptitious politician he never was investigated for illegal activity the way Nixon was and Clinton is.

FBI never got his number the way they got Clinton or Nixon. No secret communications set up.-- as far as we know.lol

Not as interesting as nixons downfall was nor as interesting as Clinton's fall is.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Citylaw on November 24, 2015, 09:05:40 AM
Because was the scared of Cheney Hilary is an easy target, she doesn't shoot people in the face.

It's clear you really believe what Hilary has done is unforgivable and the worst thing that a any of the potential presidential candidates has done. More power to you, to me it is certainly not beneficial to her, but one of the candidates may very well have rigged the 2000 election to help his brother become president, another fled prosecution in his own country, but does not think others should be allowed to. Ben Carson has lied about all kinds of things in his past, the list goes on and on.

At the end of the day no Presidential Candidate or person is perfect we all have flaws and make mistakes, but to you the investigation into Hilary is a huge deal. To me personally hypocrisy is the most annoying thing, but that might mean little to you. That is your choice and keep preaching man, but I don't think in reality this whole situation will have much impact. It is fodder to use in the election and there will be plenty of other issues raised about all the candidates as we move forward.





Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on November 24, 2015, 02:04:15 PM
Because was the scared of Cheney Hilary is an easy target, she doesn't shoot people in the face.

It's clear you really believe what Hilary has done is unforgivable and the worst thing that a any of the potential presidential candidates has done. More power to you, to me it is certainly not beneficial to her, but one of the candidates may very well have rigged the 2000 election to help his brother become president, another fled prosecution in his own country, but does not think others should be allowed to. Ben Carson has lied about all kinds of things in his past, the list goes on and on.

At the end of the day no Presidential Candidate or person is perfect we all have flaws and make mistakes, but to you the investigation into Hilary is a huge deal. To me personally hypocrisy is the most annoying thing, but that might mean little to you. That is your choice and keep preaching man, but I don't think in reality this whole situation will have much impact. It is fodder to use in the election and there will be plenty of other issues raised about all the candidates as we move forward.

I'm glad you finally see the unique difference between most politicians and the ones who get caught by the FBI.

Nixon and Clinton demise interesting and unusual...hypocrisy to me is commonplace.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Citylaw on November 24, 2015, 02:46:35 PM
Precisely to you blatant hypocrisy is nothing, which is fine it is pretty commonplace in politics. Conversely to me a Politician under investigation is nothing new either.  Reagan example authorized drug deals to get weapons there was an investigation into that, but nothing happened and I frankly think that is worse than what Hilary did, but i still don't think it is that big of an issue.

When your responsible for mass amounts of power you are inevitably going to do something questionable and your political opponents will do whatever they can to publicize and criticize you for it.  To me that is commonplace and it certainly does not help Hilary's cause.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on November 25, 2015, 12:47:36 AM
Precisely to you blatant hypocrisy is nothing, which is fine it is pretty commonplace in politics. Conversely to me a Politician under investigation is nothing new either.  Reagan example authorized drug deals to get weapons there was an investigation into that, but nothing happened and I frankly think that is worse than what Hilary did, but i still don't think it is that big of an issue.

When your responsible for mass amounts of power you are inevitably going to do something questionable and your political opponents will do whatever they can to publicize and criticize you for it.  To me that is commonplace and it certainly does not help Hilary's cause.

Casper Weinberger being hung out to dry was great to watch but ultimately deflatingly defeating as was his political stature.


Nixonian Jacksonian Clintonian fall from political heights--it justs sounds like a cynical poli-science tragedy.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on December 08, 2015, 08:07:09 AM
Watergate break in triggered Nixons political demise however the slow drip drip of trustworthiness and his "Negatives" began rising only after the FBI investigation began but Nixon enjoyed the popular support right up until he was elected---then the walls began crumbling down.

The latest litmus test fall polls show that most republicans including blowhard Donald trump are beating Clinton in the general election---this is a dramatic shift from earlier in the summer when she was 20 points ahead of everybody. 


That's what an FBI criminal investigation does to a campaign.

Bernie sanders on the other hand beats all the Republicans in the same litmus test polls. 

The establishment democrats are in the tank for Hillary and will ride her like the popular vote rode Nixon until the other shoe drops.  But, mark my words,
Sanders will never lose the democratic base.

The real trick is that sanders could win the general but Hillary, at tho point would lose.

Her solid 20 point lead over Republicans has vanished
Her negative numbers are the "tell tale" other problem.

Why, you still ask? Lying to grieving widows and the FBI criminal investigation.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on January 02, 2016, 09:49:29 AM
Happy new year!

Wow, New Hampshire the Conway Daily Sun has begun the year by questioning our suspect in the fbi investigations about her public response to the the benghazi victims families.  And of course, her lying and blaming youtube for her failures as a leader to the dead Americans families.

As an independent and former democrat I see this to be the second part of the FBI investigation---ethics challenges and leadership responsibilities.  This drip drip will include the film, "13 hours" to continue to toast mrs. Clintons bread.

At this point even a bigoted-democrat like donald trump can beat her in the general election.

Drip drip drip and just got a new blue popcorn to enjoy.

This is getting good.

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on January 02, 2016, 02:57:13 PM
Happy new year!

Wow, New Hampshire the Conway Daily Sun has begun the year by questioning our suspect in the fbi investigations about her public response to the the benghazi victims families.  And of course, her lying and blaming youtube for her failures as a leader to the dead Americans families.

As an independent and former democrat I see this to be the second part of the FBI investigation---ethics challenges and leadership responsibilities.  This drip drip will include the film, "13 hours" to continue to toast mrs. Clintons bread.

At this point even a bigoted-democrat like donald trump can beat her in the general election.

Drip drip drip and just got a new blue popcorn to enjoy.

This is getting good.
stop posting drunk
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on January 03, 2016, 10:41:35 AM
Irrelevant.  All politicians lie and the really bad ones get exposed and never are elected again.  It has been intriguing watching the demise of the former First Lady, a clinical congenial liar.


We don't need to wait for the FBI, she has begun the year as THE go-to congenial liar.

This label is stuck to her; just like nixon.

13 hours!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on January 03, 2016, 10:06:03 PM
Irrelevant.....


CONFESSION

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on January 04, 2016, 09:36:14 AM
Headlines, "Hillary Clinton SILENCES another RAPE survivor"

Doesn't Hillary know this is 2016???
She slimed many a sexual assault and rape victim.  That's the Clinton way.

Wow!!! Almost forgot hillarys public War on many, many women.

The doomed Hillary Clinton campaign/show has just opened the year with a giant poop in her pantsuit l!!!!

Man! This shite smells bad and wont be going away anytime soon..

Just ask bill Cosby.


You can view hillarys handiwork in her upcoming film, "13 hours"
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on January 04, 2016, 09:40:16 AM
Getting popcorn ready for some new year political drama.

Gonna watch biography of Nixon on history channel.

What a sense of foreboding, trinite.

Marco Rubio is the token winner by your estimation right? Lol.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on January 04, 2016, 10:28:20 PM
Trinite, I think the name trinite awesome and I hope it sticks for you. Aside from that.

I think your tokenism has a place here if this is something you might find follows the mold whicjph I don't entirely grasp--pardon my ignorance.

But would "old angry no filter uncle"  be the token candidate this time around. " but Because chris christie (god help us) god help us all could be that candidate and he is one good joke away from rebutting trump--the "other old angry no filter uncle with a xenophobic brain."


While we observe hillarys poll numbers in Iowa and New Hampshire and the clown donald trump running the republican media outlet ragged. There is this.

If donald trump rips into chris christie on his fbi scandal about a bridge or his weight or his Obama hug I could see chris christie waltzing up the polls by making throwing self deprecating jokes as retorts and/or have New Jersey comebacks ready to go.  That is what is missing in both parties.  Levity. Coupled but not mutually bonded to a serious minded person who is not in the middle of an FBI investigation. 


This is clown car time  going on fuel tilt on the pinball in our republican primaries.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on January 12, 2016, 09:42:47 AM
Biden just gave his support to sanders.  Pop pop pop
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on January 12, 2016, 09:26:50 PM
So, another FBI investigation this time into the Clinton foundation. Hillary might be more simple and stupid than we think.

Wooooaaa I bet those of you were betting Hillary is the odds on favorite to win the Dem nod feel duped. Don'tcha?

So sanders could be the man, eh?

Where are the doubters now?

Cue crickets, tumbleweeds and lame excuses and caveats.

Lol
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on January 19, 2016, 09:58:35 PM
Just so, lol, you know---

So, getting back to the original ponderings. 

Will the democrats push Biden into the race and/or will there be a brokered convention?  Uncle al?? Anyone?

Once the press lets us know that Hillary has been given the bad news about a potentially orange pantsuit becoming  the new black for her.

I hope they just let Bernie be the nominee as he deserves to be!

Oddsmakers finally getting wise to the FBI.

Rubio v. Sanders looks better than a Hillary Clinton "top secret apology"
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on January 20, 2016, 09:43:10 AM
Will the democrats push Biden into the race and/or will there be a brokered convention?  Uncle al?? Anyone?

No, at this point Clinton is almost guaranteed the nomination. Sanders can win Iowa and New Hampshire, but that appears to be it. Clinton has a very commanding lead in just about every other primary. She will easily get enough delegates.

There is no push for Biden, certainly not for Gore. A brokered convention? Why? If Clinton has enough delegates, and the DNC wants her anyway, why would there be a brokered convention?

As far as orange jumpsuits, I'll believe it when I see it. We've heard this about Clinton a hundred times before. Some looming scandal is going to take her down. Never happens. Remember how the Benghazi hearings were supposed to be some kind of bombshell? Nobody cared. The House Republicans care about this stuff way more than the general public does.

The question isn't whether Sanders can get the nomination, the question is whether Clinton can win nationally.

Clinton v Trump/Cruz, I think she strolls to the White House no problem. Clinton v Rubio, however, and I think she gets nervous.

This is the irony about this race. Despite the huge electoral vote advantage she has going into the race Clinton is a vulnerable candidate, especially in swing states. The Republicans may very well hand her the keys to the WH simply because they can't seem to nominate a reasonable candidate. Amazing what has happened to that party.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Citylaw on January 21, 2016, 05:15:14 PM
The only problem I see with Bernie is that when he asks the Department of Agriculture to grow trees to give everyone free sh*t and it doesn't work what then?

Bernie says all the right things, but I don't see how he will do any of it. If he proves me wrong that will be awesome, but to me his ideas are about as practical as Trumps, but at least Bernie has a good heart unlike Trump.


Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on January 21, 2016, 05:42:39 PM
Yeah, I more or less agree. Sanders is an honest guy, and his heart is definitely in the right place. But as you say it's not very realistic at this point.

For example, I constantly see people posting stuff on social media about the awesomeness of the democratic socialist EU countries (Finland, Ireland, Denmark, etc). "In Denmark the minimum wage is $20 an hour and universities are free!" Well, I actually know something about these countries (I'm a dual citizen with one), and here's the point the memes always omit: the average joe in those countries pays 50% in taxes.

Not millionaires, not CEOs with yachts, but average people. Bernie says he can do it by just taxing the rich, but I don't buy it. Sweden wasn't able to sustain the welfare state by only taxing ABBA, and neither will we. Sooner or later, the kinds of programs that Bernie wants will require the average middle class American to pay much higher taxes. And at that point, he will be the most unpopular man in America.

Also, they have rather draconian immigration policies which are designed to limit the number of people who can access the welfare state. Try emigrating to Norway sometime and let me know how it goes. I assume this is not something Bernie is interested in emulating.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on January 21, 2016, 08:50:35 PM
Call me old fashioned here...............but "Better Dead Than Red" Mr. Sanders (all I am willing to say on the matter)
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on January 22, 2016, 12:16:26 PM
Call me old fashioned here...............but "Better Dead Than Red" Mr. Sanders (all I am willing to say on the matter)

I don't necessarily disagree with Sanders on certain issues, and I don't think he's "red". For example, I think it's absurd that the richest country in the world doesn't have a comprehensive public healthcare system. We have a patchwork of policies and agencies that sort of form a national healthcare system. Seems silly.

But he is very much like modern European democratic socialists, which is fine as long as you're realistic about the costs and limitations.

The countries which have successfully adopted this model tend to be very small (5-20 million) and have very high taxes. I don't know if people like Sanders have ever really considered the implications of trying to establish such a system in a diverse nation of 350 million. To my knowledge, it has never happened.

Another point that I think American socialists don't realize is this:

The European welfare state system did not create the high standard of living that many enjoy, so much as it preserved what was already in place.

For example, Sweden already had a very high standard of living and a highly educated, mostly middle class, populace by the time the welfare state really kicked in (1960s and 70s). That's not the case in America. We have poverty and socio-economic disparity totally unlike anything Scandinavia can imagine. People like Sanders are expecting an American welfare state to fix that, but I'm not sure how realistic it is.

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on January 22, 2016, 11:16:19 PM
Fine............Let "Pinkie" go find his Brain.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on January 24, 2016, 10:14:04 PM
Will the democrats push Biden into the race and/or will there be a brokered convention?  Uncle al?? Anyone?

No, at this point Clinton is almost guaranteed the nomination. Sanders can win Iowa and New Hampshire, but that appears to be it. Clinton has a very commanding lead in just about every other primary. She will easily get enough delegates.

There is no push for Biden, certainly not for Gore. A brokered convention? Why? If Clinton has enough delegates, and the DNC wants her anyway, why would there be a brokered convention?

As far as orange jumpsuits, I'll believe it when I see it. We've heard this about Clinton a hundred times before. Some looming scandal is going to take her down. Never happens. Remember how the Benghazi hearings were supposed to be some kind of bombshell? Nobody cared. The House Republicans care about this stuff way more than the general public does.

The question isn't whether Sanders can get the nomination, the question is whether Clinton can win nationally.

Clinton v Trump/Cruz, I think she strolls to the White House no problem. Clinton v Rubio, however, and I think she gets nervous.

This is the irony about this race. Despite the huge electoral vote advantage she has going into the race Clinton is a vulnerable candidate, especially in swing states. The Republicans may very well hand her the keys to the WH simply because they can't seem to nominate a reasonable candidate. Amazing what has happened to that party.

Amusing assessment.   Good luck with your hillary theory--though you may want to check out the Sheldon Silver story to see how a "I'll believe it when I see it" theory evolves. 

Rubio will probably win this thing. 
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on January 24, 2016, 10:27:55 PM
Will the democrats push Biden into the race and/or will there be a brokered convention?  Uncle al?? Anyone?

No, at this point Clinton is almost guaranteed the nomination. Sanders can win Iowa and New Hampshire, but that appears to be it. Clinton has a very commanding lead in just about every other primary. She will easily get enough delegates.

There is no push for Biden, certainly not for Gore. A brokered convention? Why? If Clinton has enough delegates, and the DNC wants her anyway, why would there be a brokered convention?

As far as orange jumpsuits, I'll believe it when I see it. We've heard this about Clinton a hundred times before. Some looming scandal is going to take her down. Never happens. Remember how the Benghazi hearings were supposed to be some kind of bombshell? Nobody cared. The House Republicans care about this stuff way more than the general public does.

The question isn't whether Sanders can get the nomination, the question is whether Clinton can win nationally.

Clinton v Trump/Cruz, I think she strolls to the White House no problem. Clinton v Rubio, however, and I think she gets nervous.

This is the irony about this race. Despite the huge electoral vote advantage she has going into the race Clinton is a vulnerable candidate, especially in swing states. The Republicans may very well hand her the keys to the WH simply because they can't seem to nominate a reasonable candidate. Amazing what has happened to that party.

Amusing assessment.   Good luck with your hillary theory--though you may want to check out the Sheldon Silver story to see how a "I'll believe it when I see it" theory evolves. 

Rubio will probably win this thing.
Uncle Al? They already have an "uncle" of their own last I checked...................... .......and he straight up KILLED a guy last week
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on January 27, 2016, 03:29:36 PM




As was explained to you, the initial leaked reports that Clinton was being investigated were incorrect. That the FBI is conducting an investigation into the overall matter is correct, but she is not the target of an investigation; that was a retracted story. I realize that you don't have the time or energy to get these basic facts correct, even when it was explained to you over five weeks ago, but it is what it is.

And, as I explained to you before, I am not a fan of Clinton. You may find that you will be less disappointed with reality when you base your opinions on what is occurring, as opposed to what you want to believe.
 popcorn.

Believe what you want to believe as well, but admit that maybe you drank the koolaid. Admitting you are not a Clinton fan is the first step.

We probably wont be hearing from this poster again since it is now obvious that Hillary, herself is the "subject" of the FBI criminal investigation.

This poster was wrong and misguided.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on January 28, 2016, 11:25:58 AM




As was explained to you, the initial leaked reports that Clinton was being investigated were incorrect. That the FBI is conducting an investigation into the overall matter is correct, but she is not the target of an investigation; that was a retracted story. I realize that you don't have the time or energy to get these basic facts correct, even when it was explained to you over five weeks ago, but it is what it is.

And, as I explained to you before, I am not a fan of Clinton. You may find that you will be less disappointed with reality when you base your opinions on what is occurring, as opposed to what you want to believe.
 popcorn.

Believe what you want to believe as well, but admit that maybe you drank the koolaid. Admitting you are not a Clinton fan is the first step.

We probably wont be hearing from this poster again since it is now obvious that Hillary, herself is the "subject" of the FBI criminal investigation.

This poster was wrong and misguided.

I don't keep posting here because it just keeps the troll (you) alive. You have nothing to say about any legal issue, and your knowledge of the law, or politics, or of anything barely rises to the level of the average youtube commenter.

But to accept your challenge, again, my original post was correct. The story you kept citing was retracted. Moreover, the original contention was correct. Clinton is not the subject of any investigation. The investigation is into the overall matter. There was a Fox News report, citing "sources," but nothing else, and you've misconstrued that as well.

As for hearing from me, I continue to be active commenting on legal topics. You, on the other hand, continue to occasionally troll here with bad information. So I'm not going to bother posting again, other than noting that you refused my bet because you don't actually believe the BS you are peddling.

So go peddle it somewhere else, where people are gullible and you might come off as knowledgeable. Well, I don't if there is any place that the second criterion would be met, but you get the idea. Wait ... you probably don't.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Groundhog on January 28, 2016, 09:00:02 PM
So, did anyone watch the Republican debate?
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on February 02, 2016, 02:35:44 PM




As was explained to you, the initial leaked reports that Clinton was being investigated were incorrect. That the FBI is conducting an investigation into the overall matter is correct, but she is not the target of an investigation; that was a retracted story. I realize that you don't have the time or energy to get these basic facts correct, even when it was explained to you over five weeks ago, but it is what it is.

And, as I explained to you before, I am not a fan of Clinton. You may find that you will be less disappointed with reality when you base your opinions on what is occurring, as opposed to what you want to believe.
 popcorn.

Believe what you want to believe as well, but admit that maybe you drank the koolaid. Admitting you are not a Clinton fan is the first step.

We probably wont be hearing from this poster again since it is now obvious that Hillary, herself is the "subject" of the FBI criminal investigation.

This poster was wrong and misguided.

I don't keep posting here because it just keeps the troll (you) alive. You have nothing to say about any legal issue, and your knowledge of the law, or politics, or of anything barely rises to the level of the average youtube commenter.

But to accept your challenge, again, my original post was correct. The story you kept citing was retracted. Moreover, the original contention was correct. Clinton is not the subject of any investigation. The investigation is into the overall matter. There was a Fox News report, citing "sources," but nothing else, and you've misconstrued that as well.

As for hearing from me, I continue to be active commenting on legal topics. You, on the other hand, continue to occasionally troll here with bad information. So I'm not going to bother posting again, other than noting that you refused my bet because you don't actually believe the BS you are peddling.

So go peddle it somewhere else, where people are gullible and you might come off as knowledgeable. Well, I don't if there is any place that the second criterion would be met, but you get the idea. Wait ... you probably don't.

Hey dum dum, you should put the koolaide down and get up to date.  You have to read more than one newspaper account of events and details to understand a particular topic.  And try to keep up with the rest of us as far as developments.

Hillary Clinton IS the subject of a criminal FBI investigation regarding mishandling and gross negligence regarding classified information.

The story has changed my puerile friend. 

Try to keep up.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on February 03, 2016, 10:04:23 AM
Hillary Clinton IS the subject of a criminal FBI investigation regarding mishandling and gross negligence regarding classified information.

See? This is why I hate the interwebs. It makes me have to defend people that I don't even particularly like, such as Hillary Clinton.

Cinnamon: there is an FBI investigation into how classified documents were handled at the State Dept, Clinton's emails have been looked at as part of that investigation, but Clinton is NOT the subject of the investigation.

This may sound like I'm over-parsing my words, but that's how law works! If you're NOT the subject of the investigation your chances of being indicted are nil unless the focus of the investigation switches to you.

Could that happen here? Possibly, but other than Tom DeLay claiming that he has "sources" who warn of an impending indictment, there is no evidence to support the claim.

I know that you want very badly for Clinton to be the subject of the investigation and to be indicted, but wishing won't make it happen. So far, they have found no indictable offense.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Citylaw on February 03, 2016, 11:53:08 AM
Well when the interweb drives you nuts, don't respond. Certain people just want to say absurd things to get a response, because in real life nobody listens to them, but on the interweb anyone in the world can say anything they want, and it has as much weight as anyone else.

This thread is a perfect example of that.



Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on February 05, 2016, 04:39:15 PM
My friends who think Hillary Clinton is not the subject of an investigation---

It's ok.  The FBI is not investigating Hillary Clinton at all.  That is why 3 of her former aides are scheduled to be "interviewed"---cops call it questioning a witness. Witnesses can be very helpful and when they get lawyers---the cops know they are on the right track.

They are only going to ask harmless questions, and democrats have NOTHING to worry about, I'm sure some democrats don't even think these interviews are taking place. Right?

Tom Delay said Hillary is the subject of an investigation? Really? That is funny. Who cares.

Maybe reading a few or many periodicals periodically---instead of watching CNN and fox some who think the FBI is blindly investigating someone's email communication without any direction will eventually understand that their being naive.

It's ok, anyway Bernie is now tied with Clinton nationally and he will probably win the nomination.

I am seriously enjoying Hillary Clinton's fall from grace...
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on February 05, 2016, 04:44:28 PM
InterWEB. Really?

Lmao!!!

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on February 05, 2016, 11:33:40 PM
Hillary won the primary

now what?
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on February 06, 2016, 09:00:46 AM
Hillary won the primary

now what?

it is possible that mrs. Hillary will win the nomination, although it gets more exciting everyday as the fbi is actively investigating mrs. Hillary's server and ALL mrs. hillarys communications via her private "secret" email account.   fbi is looking into her emails for possible coverup from government oversight--as well as all mrs. Hillary's aides who were in her server system.   

at some point this investigation will bubble to the surface that Mrs. Hillary herself will be interviewed by the FBI.   like Nixon, the fbi investigation will deteriorate all confidence in the "subject" of the investigation.

the trick is that the Clintons have dirt on many politicians and it will be interesting to watch the collateral damage. 

I don't see her making it all the way to the November elections but if she does at some point the fbi will have to "publish" their findings.

I, unlike some who have commented on this thread am not naïve that the fbi investigation should be taken seriously and that the longer this plays out--the deeper mrs. Hillary is in doo-doo
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on February 06, 2016, 05:43:13 PM
She already won, just accept it and move on.

Sanders ALWAYS was a joke, handpicked to grab media attention away from any real viable party contenders and yet been too coo coo for coco puffs to get the votes needed to himself beat her

Its all been a rigged show, and the sad part is you can tell man has no clue about it either (really really sad)
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on February 07, 2016, 10:29:59 AM
...or perhaps some of us have actual experience with federal investigations and understand the process beyond wishful thinking.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on February 07, 2016, 02:22:10 PM
...or perhaps some of us have actual experience with federal investigations and understand the process beyond wishful thinking.

at me or the other guy??
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Si-tripio on February 08, 2016, 03:27:45 AM
Donald Chump
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on February 09, 2016, 02:30:57 PM
....some of us actually understand how the law is applied.
....and read more than one periodical
....and don't watch CNN or FOX.

"After days of mendaciously portraying the FBI's serious, expanded, multi-pronged criminal investigation into her national security-compromising emails and related conduct as a "security review," the Bureau has now publicly repudiated her spin.  It's real, and it's spectacular."
--a periodical

Sorry, I Maintain this periodical put it well. Lol!!!

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on February 09, 2016, 02:33:38 PM
She already won, just accept it and move on.

Sanders ALWAYS was a joke, handpicked to grab media attention away from any real viable party contenders and yet been too coo coo for coco puffs to get the votes needed to himself beat her

Its all been a rigged show, and the sad part is you can tell man has no clue about it either (really really sad)

Sanders is a joke?  Very funny.
Funny he tied Clinton in Iowa and is going to clobber her in new Hampshire. 

Good thing you pay attention.

Hillary looks like gimp now. Ha ha ha!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on February 11, 2016, 07:58:00 AM




my original post was correct. The story you kept citing was retracted. Moreover, the original contention was correct. Clinton is not the subject of any investigation. The investigation is into the overall matter. There was a Fox News report, citing "sources," but nothing else, and you've misconstrued that as well.


. So I'm not going to bother posting again,

ITS OFFICIAL, HILLARY IS THE SUBJECT of a criminal investigation--some of us already knew this.

And, as I explained to you before, I am not a fan of Clinton. You may find that you will be less disappointed with reality when you base your opinions on what is occurring, as opposed to what you want to believe.

LESSON:
.....stop watching fox news and READ more diverse periodicals--if you really want to understand what is going on.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on February 11, 2016, 08:30:32 PM
because if you say it loud enough on the internet

it will become true.........
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on February 18, 2016, 07:41:22 AM
Next we have Nevada.  Seems like Bernie sanders is going to beat her in that state.  She was supposed to win it handily.  What happened?

Anybody still thinking the FBI investigation is not going to have consequences or sanders is a joke candidate?

Not lol now right?

DRIP DRIP DRIP..

POPCORN IS AWESOME!!!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on February 19, 2016, 01:30:42 PM
So, where are all those posters who "dont-care-for-Hillary" but think she is going to win the democratic primary and lmfao........she is absolutely going to be president??????

And those who think sanders is nit going to win this puppy????

How ya doin guys???

Still sipping koolaide and denying there is a criminal FBI investigation going on???"
.....that's what I thought!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on February 20, 2016, 06:13:04 PM
Well, she just won SC by 20 points and is ahead in every single subsequent primary. Nevada is the only one that's close, and even there she's still ahead. She has 350-something superdelegates, Sanders has two.

Nothing in politics is certain, but if we're looking at likely scenarios based on EVIDENCE, not hopes, then she's the most likely candidate. Can you provide a single piece of evidence to contradict anything I've just said? Polls which show her losing subsequent primaries? Superdelegates switching sides? No? Then everything you're saying is just idle banter, no facts. 
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on February 20, 2016, 06:17:41 PM
So, where are all those posters who "dont-care-for-Hillary" but think she is going to win the democratic primary and lmfao........she is absolutely going to be president??????

BTW, I've never said she was "absolutely going to be president". Maybe someone else did. That depends on who the Republicans nominate. If it's a nut like Trump, then yeah, she'll win. If it's Rubio, maybe not.

If you think Hillary has skeletons in her closet, can you even imagine the crap that they've already got on Trump and are holding back for later? Who knows what that has in his closet.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on February 21, 2016, 12:19:29 AM
She has (and always has had) a 100% chance of winning the nomination. The elderly white male socialist is a joke and a cartoon cardboard opponent (but no one told him, poor guy)

And there are no viable republicans to beat her. I don't support her. I think she seems insane. But she'll win. 100% chance of it.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on February 27, 2016, 08:26:46 PM
Colorado, Minnesota, Vermont, Massachusetts, North Dakota Oklahoma, Wyoming.....

And drip drip drip FBI investigation is real and spectacular.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on February 29, 2016, 07:44:14 AM
"One major feature of FBI investigations has been completely ignored. The bureau normally interviews all the key participants, and it knows the answers before it asks the questions. That should mean closed-door sessions with Abedin, Mills, Sullivan, and, ultimately, Hillary Clinton and perhaps Bill Clinton (if the foundation’s activities are at issue). Failing to interview them would replicate the botched Benghazi investigation by Adm. Mike Mullin and Ambassador Thomas Pickering. The FBI won’t repeat that mistake or subject itself to the withering criticism.

These interviews are deadly serious. Former Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert learned that the hard way. When the FBI asked why he had withdrawn cash from his bank account, he lied. He was caught and, last October, plead guilty to a felony.

So, will Abedin, Mills, or Sullivan answer fully and truthfully or invoke their Fifth Amendment rights? If they did, would it become known and hurt Hillary politically? If she refuses to testify herself, her political career is over. She won’t do that unless she fears indictment is certain, and she would have to drop out of the presidential race anyway"

Periodical.

This has been the most exciting election year in a long time.  The demise of the Clintons particularly Hillary is AWESOME!!!

Drip, drip, drip---pop, pop, pop!!!!😁
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on February 29, 2016, 09:13:01 AM

Periodical.



I will be brief. A website is not a periodical. Shocker. An op-ed by a person most known for writing a prior op-ed called, "Barack Obama's Presidency is spiraling downward," is not reporting.

Yes, we know that you love your popcorn. And before this, you got your popcorn out for the Benghazi hearing. And, well, that went as everyone expected except for you. And you have made many fearless predictions, such as Bernie will win it all, and the GOP will have an amazing and awesome candidate.

Here's the problem. Essentially, your predictions are non-falsifiable, as are those of any troll. That's why we're not responding to you (this will be my last exception). Other people bother with facts, and what is. That doesn't mean they will be right- after all, no one knows the future. But it means that they are basing on something other than want to happen.

On the other hand, you just repeat the same things. You will be here, trolling the same comments. If something happens, you can be right. If Clinton is elected, you will just say, "Oh, there must have been a cover up! I will be here with my popcorn, waiting for the revelations!"

Of course, I suppose one could make a substantial amount of money by taking whatever you say, and betting against it. Perhaps you'd be so kind to provide us your popcorn-worthy list of who will win the NBA Championship? I am quite positive that you have the 76ers.

In the meantime, enjoy your popcorn. Whether you are right (unlikely, if the past predicts the future) or wrong, why not take your political posturings to a place where people are a) more likely to care, and b) less likely to know that you're completely full of it?
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on February 29, 2016, 01:25:08 PM
I will be brief.  Lol.

You are obviously a koolaide drinking Democrat.

FBI investigations are serious and this criminal investigation has already affected her.

You are a little troll in denial

Drip drip drip.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on February 29, 2016, 01:34:55 PM
FBI investigations are serious and this criminal investigation has already affected her.

Yes, that must be why she lost so decisively in Nevada and South Carolina. Oh, wait...

Look at the polls, look at the numbers. The only thing that will prevent HRC from becoming President is if the Republicans get their collective shizz together and nominate someone other than Mussolini. That too, seems unlikely.

If Clinton is elected, you will just say, "Oh, there must have been a cover up! I will be here with my popcorn, waiting for the revelations!"

Exactly. I got into a discussion with a guy once who was touting the Paul McCartney-is-Dead conspiracy. When I pointed out that there is no actual evidence to support the claim, he responded "Of course not! They covered it up man!" Logical reasoning at it's finest. 
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on February 29, 2016, 03:21:31 PM

Exactly. I got into a discussion with a guy once who was touting the Paul McCartney-is-Dead conspiracy. When I pointed out that there is no actual evidence to support the claim, he responded "Of course not! They covered it up man!" Logical reasoning at it's finest.

Yep. No more feeding the troll for me. I will say this - it's amazing not just how wrong he is, but how spectacularly. Even a stopped watch is right twice a day.

But engaging a troll is like banging you head against a wall; it only feels good when you stop. :)
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on February 29, 2016, 11:42:58 PM
I will be brief.  Lol.

You are obviously a koolaide drinking Democrat.

FBI investigations are serious and this criminal investigation has already affected her.

You are a little troll in denial



I can think of 3 things wrong with this statement...........

And for real, the use of Democrat as an insult (with zero thought behind it) proves the next layer. You don't support Sanders, you just hate Hillary. Why? Because you know she's the threat.

Tell me, who do you support of the Republican side and why
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on March 01, 2016, 03:31:53 PM
Super Tuesday has arrived and looks like Bernie will be in this for the slog.

He's got the money, he's got the momentum, he's got the message.  He does NOT have the FBI investigating a criminal case against him draining votes.

Again- Minnesota, Michigan, Vermont, Colorado, and more to come.

Let the FBI take its time-- the drip drip drip is eroding away at the Clinton campaign.  And when they knock on hill's door for an interview Bernie will be positioned well.

Somebody get the butter!!!! Lol!!!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on March 01, 2016, 03:40:38 PM
Oh, yeah and lets see what happens in Massachusetts--progressive central.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on March 01, 2016, 03:42:05 PM

Exactly. I got into a discussion with a guy once who was touting the Paul McCartney-is-Dead conspiracy. When I pointed out that there is no actual evidence to support the claim, he responded "Of course not! They covered it up man!" Logical reasoning at it's finest.

Yep. No more feeding the troll for me. I will say this - it's amazing not just how wrong he is, but how spectacularly. Even a stopped watch is right twice a day.

But engaging a troll is like banging you head against a wall; it only feels good when you stop. :)

Koolaide drinking democrats are too easy to fool, right?
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on March 01, 2016, 09:37:30 PM
Super Tuesday has arrived and looks like Bernie will be in this for the slog.

He's got the money, he's got the momentum, he's got the message.  He does NOT have the FBI investigating a criminal case against him draining votes.

Again- Minnesota, Michigan, Vermont, Colorado, and more to come.

Let the FBI take its time-- the drip drip drip is eroding away at the Clinton campaign.  And when they knock on hill's door for an interview Bernie will be positioned well.

Somebody get the butter!!!! Lol!!!
The results aren't even in yet and I already know you are wrong
get a life man

Its ALREADY down to Trump vs Hillary, and she won't lose to Trump
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on March 02, 2016, 12:08:52 AM
Super Tuesday has arrived and looks like Bernie will be in this for the slog.

He's got the money, he's got the momentum, he's got the message.  He does NOT have the FBI investigating a criminal case against him draining votes.

Again- Minnesota, Michigan, Vermont, Colorado, and more to come.

Let the FBI take its time-- the drip drip drip is eroding away at the Clinton campaign.  And when they knock on hill's door for an interview Bernie will be positioned well.

Somebody get the butter!!!! Lol!!!
The results aren't even in yet and I already know you are wrong
get a life man

Its ALREADY down to Trump vs Hillary, and she won't lose to Trump

How did bernie do in Colorado, Minnesota, Vermont, and Oklahoma?   Sad, that he lost Massachusetts in a landslide.

Nah, Bernie's wins have nothing to do with his message nor the FBI, right?

Guess he's getting out of the race now?

Guess again, Sherlock.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on March 02, 2016, 10:16:03 AM
How did bernie do in Colorado, Minnesota, Vermont, and Oklahoma?   Sad, that he lost Massachusetts in a landslide.

He did fine in those states, but so what? There were twelve primaries and Clinton won eight of them. The number of delegates she got from Texas alone practically nullifies Sanders' wins. She will be the nominee.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on March 03, 2016, 09:27:29 AM
How did bernie do in Colorado, Minnesota, Vermont, and Oklahoma?   Sad, that he lost Massachusetts in a landslide.

He did fine in those states, but so what? There were twelve primaries and Clinton won eight of them. The number of delegates she got from Texas alone practically nullifies Sanders' wins. She will be the nominee.


Oh, so I wasn't wrong about those 4 states?  Obama did better than Bernie in Massachusetts when he ran in 2008? I wasn't wrong about those insignificant states and votes?

What about Kansas? Or Nevada? Is Hillary going to win them?

I know sone on this board think the fbi criminal investigation doesn't exist, but you know its real? Right?  You know its seriously taking her down, right.

Hell, one voter is all it will take to completely take out Hillary.

His name? Bryan pagliano
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on March 04, 2016, 01:34:03 AM
You create a side argument that means nothing and go your usual full retard on it

-reading comp...........learn it/use it
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on March 04, 2016, 07:17:25 PM
You create a side argument that means nothing and go your usual full retard on it

-reading comp...........learn it/use it

The results are in and you were totally wrong.   

My argument is that the FBI has been draining on clinton like some of you trolls on LSD drain mindlessly on politics from some kool aide drinking hillary cheerleading section--

aside from Bernie's message winning him pledged delicates the FBI has eroded her losing campaign.

Learn it;live it;suck up your own side argument, sherlock
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on March 04, 2016, 07:44:00 PM



[/quote]

I will be brief.  (YOU ARE a funny one, if only not unaware of what the word BRIEF means, lol)

Here's the problem. Essentially, your predictions are non-falsifiable, as are those of any troll. That's why we're not responding to you (this will be my last exception). Other people bother with facts, and what is. That doesn't mean they will be right- after all, no one knows the future. But it means that they are basing on something other than want to happen.

 If Clinton is elected, you will just say, "Oh, there must have been a cover up!

(No cover up, here the FBI criminal investigation is real)

In the meantime, enjoy your popcorn. Whether you are right

(I have been right all along-no fbi criminal investigation and hillary would already be the nominee-the fact is that she is not the runaway nominee.  Why? You ask? FBI, get it)
[/quote]

Here lol, read this-----

"The F.B.I.’s case did begin as a security referral from the inspectors general of the State Department and the nation’s intelligence agencies, who were concerned that classified information might have been stored outside a secure government network. But multiple law enforcement officials said the matter quickly became an investigation into whether anyone had committed a crime in handling classified information."


-a periodical


Now what have you been yammering on about, mr. Naive troll?
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on March 04, 2016, 09:19:54 PM
I'm pretty sure I know cin in real life.............
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on March 06, 2016, 07:27:19 PM
Sanders wins Maine, Kansas and Nebraska. 

Nah, messaging and FBI had nothing to do with that, right?

Keep reading kool aide drinkers
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on March 06, 2016, 09:47:27 PM
Sanders wins Maine, Kansas and Nebraska. 

Nah, messaging and FBI had nothing to do with that, right?

Keep reading kool aide drinkers
Stop drinking the local water........
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on March 07, 2016, 09:31:54 AM
Immunity for pagliano.

Hey hillary-koolaide crew, a question for you?

Lets bet if grand jury has been set up.

Can't wait for Hillary to be interviewed by FBI...

Lol, popcorn is awesome!!!!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on March 07, 2016, 04:57:08 PM
It definitely increases the probability that grand jury has been convened. Whether or not she is the target of the investigation is another story.

But yeah, typically immunity is offered when the govt believes that the witness has useful testimony regarding a bigger fish.

It doesn't guarantee that a grand jury has been convened, but it is interesting. The govt is usually pretty stingy with immunity. It would be interesting to know if he got letter immunity or statutory immunity.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on March 07, 2016, 05:00:44 PM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schizophrenia
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on March 09, 2016, 05:36:21 AM
Bernie beat Hillary in Michigan....

Guess who is going to win the nomination now?

Clinton gonna be duck soup.

FBI interview to come, hillaryfans.


Pop pop pop
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on March 10, 2016, 04:17:29 PM
Bernie beat Hillary in Michigan....

Guess who is going to win the nomination now?

Clinton gonna be duck soup.

FBI interview to come, hillaryfans.


Pop pop pop
first of all, there is only two pops there magnitude
second........... math isn't your friend is it?
http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=all+community+magnitude+scenes&&view=detail&mid=2F4C50450084A7E6B5522F4C50450084A7E6B552&FORM=VRDGAR
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on March 10, 2016, 08:54:07 PM
Superdelegates, Cinnamon, superdelegates.

They are comprised almost entirely of party operatives, and most have spent the last 24 years working for Bill and/or Hillary. They are completely in the bag.

Sanders would have to win something like 75% of the remaining delegates in order to secure the nomination. Not gonna happen.

When he wins a state like Michigan by 2% that's fine, but remember that the delegates are assigned proportionately, so he only gets a few more than her. It's hard to make up the deficit by getting two or three delegates here and there.

I assume your response will ignore the math and include something about Kool-Aid, popcorn, or other tasty snacks.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on March 11, 2016, 08:16:10 AM
Barak Obama did not have hillarys superdelegate size either but his momentum with caucus voters, enthusiasm and yes pledged deligates swayed super delegates his way.  So its basically about actual votes(numbers) that I'm watching. 

I hope you are not misled into thinking this is about popcorn??? Lol

Hillarys nixonion demise is high political theatre and in enjoying her train wreck.

Also, maintain the numbers are on bernies side as he bus pulled in 42million big numbers last month.

So, basically we are looking at MnM's. Math and money.

See what Im maintaining?
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on March 11, 2016, 08:19:32 AM
There is the great western and northwestern states to vote.

FBI eroding away Hillary everyday.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on March 13, 2016, 09:08:50 PM
Bernie, the FBI and antiestablishmentarianism are driving this election


Bernie set to win Illinois and what about ohio? He's

So hillary clinton kool aide drinkers, doesn't your heart pine for the one most of you thought was and were convinced she was inevitably gong to be the nominee?   

The FBI didn't play around with nixon and they are not playing around with clinton either.  The FBI are eroding the clinton machine with legitimate cause like I've been saying all along.

So, maintain, a grand jury is on this.

Pop pop pop
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on March 15, 2016, 03:50:19 PM
Lol and the Hillary koolaide krew have been shut down by Bernie and the FBI.... Awwwwwww.

Bernie gonna win Illinois, Missouri and Ohio.

Send in the clinton clowns .....

Laughed so hard at a video of that sock puppet Debbie wasserback Shultz trying to spin Hillary s criminal investigation.

Such fun tomorrow when we wake up and Bernie has more money and more pledged votes...


Pop pop pop
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on March 16, 2016, 08:33:54 AM
Hillary won FL, OH and IL. With her pledged superdelegates, that gives her something like 1500 delegates to Bernie's 800. Notice that her speech last night was all about Trump and didn't even mention Sanders?

Pop pop pop.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on March 16, 2016, 01:17:01 PM
Hillary won FL, OH and IL. With her pledged superdelegates, that gives her something like 1500 delegates to Bernie's 800. Notice that her speech last night was all about Trump and didn't even mention Sanders?

Pop pop pop.

Amusing.  Here is the point, Bernie sanders because of his numbers-actual pledged delegates and money he is going all the way to the end.  And without him and hillarys FBI investigation she would already be the nominee. 

I like your tenacity but its not as strong as feeling the been and there are more pledged delegates for Bernie to collect.

I'm glad you are on the pop pop pop ride with me.

But those FBI interviews for Clinton and her staff are coming.

Drip drip drip.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on March 16, 2016, 01:21:49 PM
Feeling the bern is driving this election and policy.  And the mid west still to come.

So, lets maintain that this is an exciting election and it is nowhere near over, otherwise Hillary would have packed up after losing Michigan.

More exciting than Richard Nixons bumpy second term.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on March 16, 2016, 01:33:43 PM
Hillary won FL, OH and IL. With her pledged superdelegates, that gives her something like 1500 delegates to Bernie's 800. Notice that her speech last night was all about Trump and didn't even mention Sanders?

Pop pop pop.

Amusing.  Here is the point, Bernie sanders because of his numbers-actual pledged delegates and money he is going all the way to the end.  And without him and hillarys FBI investigation she would already be the nominee. 

I like your tenacity but its not as strong as feeling the been and there are more pledged delegates for Bernie to collect.

I'm glad you are on the pop pop pop ride with me.

But those FBI interviews for Clinton and her staff are coming.

Drip drip drip.
all the way to the end.......like a homeless person sleeping on the bus until its end of route.......doesn't make them a winner
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on March 16, 2016, 02:32:43 PM
My numbers might be a little off here, but:

Total delegates: 4700ish

Clinton so far: 1600

Sanders so far: 850

Clinton only needs approx. 750 more to win the nomination, while Sanders needs 750 just to break even with Clinton, then another 750 to win. So he needs to win roughly 2/3 of the outstanding delegates.

Is there any polling data anywhere that shows Sanders sweeping the rest of the primaries? Nope, there isn't.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on March 17, 2016, 01:38:37 PM
My numbers might be a little off here, but:

Total delegates: 4700ish

Clinton so far: 1600

Sanders so far: 850

Clinton only needs approx. 750 more to win the nomination, while Sanders needs 750 just to break even with Clinton, then another 750 to win. So he needs to win roughly 2/3 of the outstanding delegates.

Is there any polling data anywhere that shows Sanders sweeping the rest of the primaries? Nope, there isn't.

Clinton 1119. Sanders 821

You re hedging with the hillary count and that makes me smile but I don't always respond to people when they do this because I think they are uninformed.

You are more savvy than loki and tokenboy. But, the FBI and bernie are truly driving the elections on the Dem side. 

Otherwise, be honest with yourself shouldn't Clinton have already wrapped this up?

Now the real  question is she going under for a misdemeanor or felony?

I think a misdemeanor.

Then Bernie is in!!!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on March 17, 2016, 03:43:16 PM
I'm including the approx. 500 pledged superdelegates she has. These are not people who are on the fence and might defect to Sanders, they are dyed in the wool Clintonistas. I think it's realistic to include them.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on March 17, 2016, 08:45:25 PM
1. I don't think you have any clue what "hedging" means
2. even if convicted, her delegates wouldn't transfer (there is no rule requiring it)
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on March 17, 2016, 08:58:32 PM
BTW, she just won Missouri.

Here's the thing, Cinnamon. When Clinton gets the nomination will you say "Oops, I was wrong"?

No. You'll say "She'll never win the general election because FBI/Pagliano/Benghazi/Travelgate pop pop pop drip drip drip.

Then, when she wins the general and is sworn in as Prez you'll say "She'll be impeached because of . . ."

It's all wishful thinking. I'm not a Clinton fan either, but I don't see the point in believing in things simply because I want to, devoid of evidence.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on March 18, 2016, 07:51:16 AM

It's all wishful thinking. I'm not a Clinton fan either, but I don't see the point in believing in things simply because I want to, devoid of evidence.

Lol. This is what I say to you, since you dont think the FBI will make a case whether it is buried it not. I think you use wishful thinking to deny that a criminal investigation is open on Mrs. Clinton.

FBI investigations have consequences. And until the FBI say, that she's an angel and there was nothing there- the FBI are affecting voters.  No denying this maintain--be truthful with yourself.

I can't believe that you dont think she should have the nomination wrapped up already. That is why I think you are misled, sorry.

The pop pop pop doesn't end until the FBI have spoken. Just the facts here.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on March 18, 2016, 09:43:39 AM
I can't believe that you dont think she should have the nomination wrapped up already. That is why I think you are misled, sorry.

Cinnamon, you're missing my point.

She does have the nomination wrapped up already, Sanders has lost, and she will be the nominee. 

FBI investigations and their potential impact are just that: potential. Maybe it will have an impact, maybe it won't.

What is not potential, but is concrete fact, is that Sanders must win 2/3 of the remaining delegates to have a chance. Think about what that means for a minute. In California, for example, that means Sanders would have to magically go from his current 37% to 67% in the next few weeks. In every remaining primary Sanders would have to pick up not just 3-5 points, but more like 20-30.

There is zero evidence to suggest that's happening.

If your response is "Yes, but future FBI bombshells will affect the race", then we're back to the land of speculation and wishful thinking.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on March 18, 2016, 09:57:50 AM

If your response is "Yes, but future FBI bombshells will affect the race", then we're back to the land of speculation and wishful thinking.

Stop feeding the troll. The "popcorn" began with the Benghazi hearing. Remember, the one that Senor Toll guaranteed would be the downfall of Clinton?

Same story, different day. You can't have a discussion with someone who changes the facts to fit their opinions.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on March 18, 2016, 03:12:46 PM
http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/17/politics/sanders-concedes-missouri-to-clinton/index.html
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on March 19, 2016, 12:09:38 AM
Dear Hillary,


You had something to hide
Should have hidden it, shouldn't you
Now you're not satisfied
With what you're being put through

It's just time to pay the price
For not listening to advice
And deciding in your youth
On the policy of truth

Things could be so different now
It used to be so civilised
You will always wonder how
It could have been if you'd only lied

It's too late to change events
It's time to face the consequence
For delivering the proof
In the policy of truth

Never again
Is what you swore
The time before
Never again
Is what you swore
The time before

Now you're standing there tongue tied
You'd better learn your lesson well
Hide what you have to hide
And tell what you have to tell
You'll see your problems multiplied
If you continually decide
To faithfully pursue
The policy of truth

Never again
Is what you swore
The time before


Sincerely,

The FBI


Drip drip drip
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on March 19, 2016, 12:15:56 AM

If your response is "Yes, but future FBI bombshells will affect the race", then we're back to the land of speculation and wishful thinking.

Stop feeding the troll. The "popcorn" began with the Benghazi hearing. Remember, the one that Senor Toll guaranteed would be the downfall of Clinton?

Same story, different day. You can't have a discussion with someone who changes the facts to fit their opinions.

Ah the stupid stubborn return,

The FBI investigation has been and will continue to affect nixon err hillary throughout this race.  It has taken a huge toll on her numbers with regard to independents.  Again, it's political theatre.

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on March 19, 2016, 12:23:49 AM

If your response is "Yes, but future FBI bombshells will affect the race", then we're back to the land of speculation and wishful thinking.

Stop feeding the troll. The "popcorn" began with the Benghazi hearing. Remember, the one that Senor Toll guaranteed would be the downfall of Clinton?

Same story, different day. You can't have a discussion with someone who changes the facts to fit their opinions.

Ah the stupid stubborn return,

The FBI investigation has been and will continue to affect nixon err hillary throughout this race.  It has taken a huge toll on her numbers with regard to independents.  Again, it's political theatre.

Lol,

Here is the point.  What day will the FBI visit clinton for questioning?   Give up the ghost on benghazi and put on your big boy pants.  And lol, my friend, then after her FBI interview dips into her poll numbers some more will you go with misdemeanor or felony?   I doubt felony but misdemeanor would be nice.

That's more then nixon got, not thanks to Ford.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on March 19, 2016, 12:44:03 PM
http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/17/politics/sanders-concedes-missouri-to-clinton/index.html
:o
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on March 19, 2016, 05:09:19 PM
I can't believe that you dont think she should have the nomination wrapped up already. That is why I think you are misled, sorry.

Cinnamon, you're missing my point.

She does have the nomination wrapped up already, Sanders has lost, and she will be the nominee. 

FBI investigations and their potential impact are just that: potential. Maybe it will have an impact, maybe it won't.

What is not potential, but is concrete fact, is that Sanders must win 2/3 of the remaining delegates to have a chance. Think about what that means for a minute. In California, for example, that means Sanders would have to magically go from his current 37% to 67% in the next few weeks. In every remaining primary Sanders would have to pick up not just 3-5 points, but more like 20-30.

There is zero evidence to suggest that's happening.

If your response is "Yes, but future FBI bombshells will affect the race", then we're back to the land of speculation and wishful thinking.

Maintain, you seem to be intentionally ignoring the fact that something has affected Hillary Clinton's poll numbers.

Bernie sanders has come from 80% deficits in primary contests to make this a contest.  Also, he is raised over 42 million dollars last month.

so if Hillary has not been affected
By the FBI investigation and has not been affected by the sanders campaign why didn't she wrap this up a month ago?

Why isnt Bernie getting out of the race yet?

Lol, why are we even talking about bernie sanders?

Reminder: Hillary was supposed to be the.nominee when Barack Obama ran as well.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on March 19, 2016, 07:51:16 PM
Hillary clintons entire campaign has no enthusiasm behind it.  Bernie sanders campaign has tremendous enthusiasm behind it and he does not have the REAL continual threat of an FBI indictment hanging over his campaign.  These are facts in this exciting election year.

Watching hillary clinton squirm in every interview where she has been questioned about her furtive communications and shady dealings is utterly thrilling to me.  She squirms and becomes unhinged worse than richard nixon back in the 70s.  I'm a cynic and watching Sheldon silver wheel and deal in nyc was difficult to watch all of these years--and I don't expect much of you who read this to understand nyc politics--but HE GOT BUSTED and as he squirmed I relished the political karma unleashed upon this duplicitous, disingenuous, greedy old hack.  Such fun!!!'

I am thoroughly enjoying the demise of hillary clinton.  Nixons demise began with the watergate break in and the FBI were soon on to him but the American people did not know what the FBI were doing.  Nixon was voted into office and once his shady dealings became public and the law was coming down on him--he squirmed, resigned and was pardoned.

For hillary a big FBI interview is coming and she will be put under the microscope--then we will see if it is only a misdemeanor or a felony.  The big question is when will that happen.

Watching her poll numbers drop from an unconditional assurance of the presidency to the present where she is in a real contest with bernie sanders is pure poetic justice to me.

So, some said she was absolutely going to be the nominee before she even decided to run and I laugh at how far the bar has been lowered with their expectations thus far---the entire democratic establishment has even rigged this election for her and she STILL is fighting in two primaries---
The one against bernie sanders and the FBI primary.  Sure, State primaries she can win but as a grand jury has been convened and witnesses are formally granted immunity it looks more and more likely that she will not beat the FBI.

Where does that leave us.

If the FBI interviews hillary or huma or Cheryl on Monday we will start to see bernie gaining more votes.  It is a question of timing with regard to this criminal investigation (which some still think--kool aide drinkers--is a fairy tail) and when the FBI call people in for discussions about mishandling classified information.

Serious stuff--just ask Snowden.

Keep hoping hillary fans she may beat bernie and get closer but she can't outrun her own corrupt self


Just like Sheldon Silver.

Pop pop pop!!! ;)

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on March 19, 2016, 08:30:35 PM
The fact, not speculation that the FBI will be (let me spin this like a clinton) calling hillary and or huma or Cheryl or jake in for an "interview" is going to be a big droplet in her dripping poll numbers.

She, of course according to her campaign will be "cooperating with the FBI in being transparent"
To those of us in the biz we call it makeup before "the perp-walk".

We only speculate on when that will happen not that it will or will not happen. 8)

Then it's simple:misdemeanor or felony.


You can go on line and bet that nothing will happen, felony or misdemeanor. Try it, I did.









Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on March 20, 2016, 12:00:43 AM
http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=bernies+concession+speach&view=detail&mid=EB5DFC384A3EFFFD5134EB5DFC384A3EFFFD5134&FORM=VIRE
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on March 20, 2016, 09:34:23 AM
Bernie is going to win Idaho, Utah, Alaska, Hawaii, Washington, Wisconsin and Wyoming...

Let's see how the independents vote in these states.  ;)

I'll give hillary just one: arizona. Lol.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on March 20, 2016, 01:08:18 PM
Bernie is going to win Idaho, Utah, Alaska, Hawaii, Washington, Wisconsin and Wyoming...

Let's see how the independents vote in these states.  ;)

I'll give hillary just one: arizona. Lol.
wake me when its time to post his concession speeches from those states too...........
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on March 22, 2016, 08:24:32 AM
Ok, tokenboy
Good luck finding a concession speech in the next 10 days
Bernie is set to win these 7 states and guess what?

He will continue to run. Because if momentum enthusiasm and he has no criminal investigation systematically dismantling his campaign.

Wisconsin, Wyoming, Washington, Alaska, Hawaii, Idaho, Utah


Drip Fbi drip...lol
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on March 22, 2016, 09:23:11 AM
“FBI chief James Comey and his investigators are increasingly certain that presidential nominee Hillary Clinton violated laws in handling classified government information through her private email server,”.

A periodical
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on March 22, 2016, 01:22:25 PM
A periodical

This is so awesome, it has to be fake. I'm going to start citing my sources as "An Internet".
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on March 22, 2016, 02:08:57 PM
A periodical

This is so awesome, it has to be fake. I'm going to start citing my sources as "An Internet".

Lol. It is awesome since I'm a cynic and most folks are too lazy or ignorant to research.

This is why some don't even realize that Clinton is under a criminal investigation.

Plus the fact is that its out there makes this erosion of Hillary Clinton's career all that more enjoyable.

Even ramos asked her of she's going to suspend her campaign if she is indicted. 

I laughed so hard watching her react.  She's a squirmer.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on March 22, 2016, 02:10:31 PM
Keep thinking that its I fake, maintain.

 ;)
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on March 22, 2016, 03:31:59 PM
Ok so I was wrong about the FBI calling huma in on Monday.  It was Tuesday. Hahahahahahaha!!!!!!


Can she run under indictment?

Will she step down voluntarily?

Can the DNC make her step down?

Who would the DNC try to run in her stead since superdeligates are in the tank?

Would the koolaide drinking democrats decide that Bernie is their man?

This is awesome missa hiliary Clinton is gonna squirm like a worm--just like NIXON!!!!



Oh yeah----pop pop pop drip drip drip
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on March 22, 2016, 04:19:35 PM
Ok so I was wrong about the FBI calling huma in on Monday.  It was Tuesday. Hahahahahahaha!!!!!!

I can't find anything about Huma Abedin being questioned by the FBI.

Source?
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on March 22, 2016, 09:50:42 PM
Ok so I was wrong about the FBI calling huma in on Monday.  It was Tuesday. Hahahahahahaha!!!!!!

I can't find anything about Huma Abedin being questioned by the FBI.

Source?

You know what, maintain--I apologize, I got that wrong.  Huma was not called in tuesday this week to interview with the FBI.

I'm sorry. This is very exciting to watch--an older friend of mine who watched Nixon going through "his last twitches " in politics gave me a bad source. Sorry, I jumped the gun a little.

But feel free to take jab at questions.

Again sorry for my mistake--I think Bernie did well...i hope!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on March 22, 2016, 09:53:10 PM
Funny you never called me out on the fact that the FBI has Hillary under criminal investigation, right?

You know it to be true.  You dont even like Hillary.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on March 23, 2016, 11:43:37 PM
troll-check your *&^% before you post
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on March 24, 2016, 09:13:35 AM
troll-check your *&^% before you post

FBI is going to be taking Clinton out of the election, face it.

And tokenboy, lol, where is bernies concession speech for Idaho and Utah?

Guess what Alaska, Hawaii, Washington, Wyoming and Wisconsin are all going to be LOSSES for hiliary----

Will you post her concession speeches? Lmfao!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on March 24, 2016, 09:59:18 AM
Unless Sanders wins those states by at least 2/3, it's irrelevant. Winning by few points won't give him enough delegates to make up the difference. In fact, he could win small states like Wyoming by 100% and it would only get him a few delegates. Not nearly enough to make up for Clinton's upcoming win California. 

BTW, if the FBI is so hot on the trail of Clinton's supposed criminal activity, why have they not interviewed her or any of her associates? You keep saying they're going to, but the fact is they haven't.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on March 26, 2016, 08:43:51 AM
Unless Sanders wins those states by at least 2/3, it's irrelevant. Winning by few points won't give him enough delegates to make up the difference. In fact, he could win small states like Wyoming by 100% and it would only get him a few delegates. Not nearly enough to make up for Clinton's upcoming win California. 

BTW, if the FBI is so hot on the trail of Clinton's supposed criminal activity, why have they not interviewed her or any of her associates? You keep saying they're going to, but the fact is they haven't.

Sanders, because of his political agenda and because his opponent is under an fbi criminal investigation will continue to gather pledged voter to his cause.  He will most assuredly win the next 5 contests--here, maintain let me list them for you
Washington, Alaska, Hawaii, Wisconsin, Wyoming. .. That is momentum and reasons why bernie will not be getting out of the race.  Plus, bernie knows that if the FBI start interviewing clintons staff (like Brian pagliano) if bernie is still running the dnc cannot deny him the nomination.

Get it?

Also,

"As the FBI looks to wrap up its investigation in the coming months, agents are likely to want to interview Clinton and her senior aides about the decision to use a private server, how it was set up, and whether any of the participants knew they were sending classified information in emails, current and former officials said,"

according to the Periodical report.

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on March 26, 2016, 08:46:26 AM
Maintain, I will remind you that Brian pagliano was interviewed months ago
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on March 26, 2016, 10:31:39 AM
Maintain, I will remind you that Brian pagliano was interviewed months ago

Yes, but what came of it? So far, nothing.

If there was some bombshell in Pagliano's testimony, don't you think the FBI would have acted on it by now?
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on March 27, 2016, 12:43:57 AM
I have nothing productive to add to this

but am just f-ing amazed its still going..............
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on March 27, 2016, 07:43:14 PM
I have nothing productive to add to this

but am just f-ing amazed its still going..............

You are right! It is amazing.

You could add one of Bernie's concession speeches like you said you would.  What about this Tuesday? But if bernie wins Wisconsin and Wyoming then I would have been exact on the last 7 states I predicted he would win.

And you will again have no concession speech from bernie.

What will you do when the FBI interviews huma and hillary?

Still don't think that will happen?
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on March 27, 2016, 07:45:52 PM
Maintain, I will remind you that Brian pagliano was interviewed months ago

Yes, but what came of it? So far, nothing.

If there was some bombshell in Pagliano's testimony, don't you think the FBI would have acted on it by now?

Maintain, I think you are in a state of suspended belief about something which is transpiring before your very eyes.

You will see this more and more:


"Federal prosecutors investigating the possible mishandling of classified materials on Hillary Clinton’s private email server have begun the process of setting up formal interviews with some of her longtime and closest aides, according to two people familiar with the probe, an indication that the inquiry is moving into its final phases.
"

A periodical
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on March 27, 2016, 07:47:54 PM
No "dates have been set for questioning the advisors, but a federal prosecutor in recent weeks has called their lawyers to alert them that he would soon be doing so, the sources said. Prosecutors also are expected to seek an interview with Clinton herself, though the timing remains unclear."

Same periodical

Maintain...the FBI always take their time
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on March 29, 2016, 08:04:31 AM
So, um does anyone refute the FACT that Hillary Clinton, herself is being criminally investigated by the FBI?

Can anyone say that the FBI investigation has not seriously affected her campaign?

Didn't think so.

Drip, drip, drip.

Just buttered a fresh batch of popcorn. 

It's fun to watch a shady politician squirm!!!!!

 
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on March 31, 2016, 01:55:23 PM
"The investigation into Hillary means jack."

Yep. On that we're in complete agreement. Not sure what cinnamon is smokin', but I hope it's legal in her/his jurisdiction.

Or look up Whitewater. Or Vince Foster. Or Hillarycare. Or Benghazi. Or ... well, google it.

I m making a beyesian prediction...

Hillary is finished as a candidate fir office. Lol
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on April 01, 2016, 07:41:56 AM
After the FBI question hillarys staff regarding the evidence they have found I hope they offer Mrs. Clinton a reverse proffer and go easy on her so that she doesn't have to lie anymore.  She is probably tired of running from the law and hopefully ready to stop lying.

She wont have to say anything.....just listen to the evidence the FBI has against her and then cut her losses and  cut a deal..

No jail time.  Maybe Obama will pardon her. Maybe not.  Like Martha stewarts fate years ago hillarys  goose is cooked. ;)
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on April 03, 2016, 07:24:47 PM
30138.

Hmmm.  With interrogations coming up the crowd is on edge.

Everyone knows that the FBI is wrapping up their criminal investigation into hillary clinton and sphe will probably be the last one to be interviewed; thus being the target of the criminal probe.

Can't imagine how many chinese hackers have her yoga positions (yeah, right) and us troop movements.

Whether it's negligence or stupidity clinton won't be president.



I'm amazed by how many times Loki checks this thread a week.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on April 04, 2016, 08:37:49 PM
Maintain, I will remind you that Brian pagliano was interviewed months ago

Yes, but what came of it? So far, nothing.

If there was some bombshell in Pagliano's testimony, don't you think the FBI would have acted on it by now?

Maintain, have you given up on Hillary now that you see I was right that the FBI are going to interrogate hillary, huma and Cheryl?

Or do you think I made up that the FBI was going to interview her?

You seemed to be shocked now into silence...she may still have a chance but odds are that she was negligent. Agree?
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on April 04, 2016, 08:42:25 PM
Lets get this to 31000

Hillary📩 problem
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on April 04, 2016, 08:49:36 PM
Maintain, have you given up on Hillary now that you see I was right that the FBI are going to interrogate hillary, huma and Cheryl?

Or do you think I made up that the FBI was going to interview her?

You seemed to be shocked now into silence...she may still have a chance but odds are that she was negligent. Agree?

No, it's just that nothing new has been added to the conversation. You're just repeating the same stuff, so there's nothing interesting to respond to. 
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on April 05, 2016, 07:23:04 AM
Maintain, have you given up on Hillary now that you see I was right that the FBI are going to interrogate hillary, huma and Cheryl?

Or do you think I made up that the FBI was going to interview her?

You seemed to be shocked now into silence...she may still have a chance but odds are that she was negligent. Agree?

No, it's just that nothing new has been added to the conversation. You're just repeating the same stuff, so there's nothing interesting to respond to.

Don't feed the troll.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on April 05, 2016, 11:58:24 AM
Maintain, have you given up on Hillary now that you see I was right that the FBI are going to interrogate hillary, huma and Cheryl?

Or do you think I made up that the FBI was going to interview her?

You seemed to be shocked now into silence...she may still have a chance but odds are that she was negligent. Agree?

No, it's just that nothing new has been added to the conversation. You're just repeating the same stuff, so there's nothing interesting to respond to.

You had questioned whether or not huma, Hillary and company will be interviewed and "heard" nothing about FBI activity.

I guess you now have read about the interviews regarding the criminal probe that is the latest news and is easily "sourced" now..

Sorry, I didn't think you acknowledged that interrogations were being scheduled.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on April 05, 2016, 12:00:03 PM
Maintain, have you given up on Hillary now that you see I was right that the FBI are going to interrogate hillary, huma and Cheryl?

Or do you think I made up that the FBI was going to interview her?

You seemed to be shocked now into silence...she may still have a chance but odds are that she was negligent. Agree?

No, it's just that nothing new has been added to the conversation. You're just repeating the same stuff, so there's nothing interesting to respond to.

Don't feed the troll.

Give it up lol. You've been proven wrong and are discredited I your assumptions.

FBI coming for hillary and its criminal!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on April 05, 2016, 10:29:12 PM
Wisconsin Bernie won.
Wyoming NEXT.

Not one concession speech from Hillary?

Can anyone explain this?
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on April 05, 2016, 10:35:13 PM
Oh yeah, almost forgot......
Bernie actually WON Nevada

Not Clinton. This I interesting that the main stream media buried the issue. I bet most who view this thread and don't comment didn't know that he actually won that state.



Amazing!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on April 07, 2016, 01:44:22 PM
31000



Ok, while the posters who were arguing that there is no criminal probe into Hillary Clinton's actions have gone deaf and dumb regarding her serious issue they have NOT gone blind as they view this thread EVERYDAY and can't refute the inevitable.  LMFAO!

They cant even defend Hillary Clinton any more..."oh, all politicians lie." "forgive her".  Bullshite!

I challenge anyone to list 3 of hillarys accomplishments!!!!!!!!


Nobody can do this because she has NONE.

But good luck; I dont see it happening
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on April 07, 2016, 01:48:13 PM
You know Hillary is in serious trouble when cnn rolls out Claire McCaskel and James Carville to defend her. 

....hillarys time is almost up.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on April 08, 2016, 08:05:44 AM
Well, we’re certainly going to carry on. I think it’s a security review,” Clinton said. “It is a security review and there are lots of those that are conducted in our government all the time and you don’t hear about most of them. You hear about this one because, you know, it does involve me, so that’s why it gets so much attention.”


Wow. I guess I was wrong. Hillary is not under criminal investigation.
I thought for sure that she has some legal issues.

Strange.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on April 12, 2016, 02:47:22 PM
So with this security referral by the FBI...why should Clinton even talk with them? 
Will it look bad for her if she says to them to conduct their security inquiry without her, after all she is running for president and she is busy.

Condoliza rice and Colin Powel both had their own private emails which they conducted ALL of their business on and they both had their own private email servers to conduct their government business.

Both Condoleezza Rice and Colin Powell had "top secret classified information" regarding military intelligence information removed from the compartmentalized secure computer system and put it in their private email system.

Neither Rice nor Powells emails were compromised by hackers---everyone knows that hackers can't easily get into private email systems.

Both Rice and Powell had their email servers sent to a private company to have their  personal emails erased.

When the FBI prosecutes those who mishandled classified information they always find the special "classified markings" on the document...these markings can never be stripped off.

Hillary should be fine with this review.

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on April 17, 2016, 08:55:34 AM
Clinton---1,305
Sanders--1,099

That's 206 delegates behind Clinton

He is not getting out of a race he could win.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on April 17, 2016, 09:00:30 AM
Seriously, if Hillary Clinton is the odds favorite to win shouldn't she have wrapped this up by now?

What could possibly be holding her back?

How could so many Hillary Clinton supporters have been so wrong?

Ps. This thread gets more attention than any other. Interesting.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on April 19, 2016, 02:50:32 PM
Bernie should come within 8 points behind clinton in New York----effectively keeping his momentum strong and she still wont have enough pledged delegates to beat him.

More interesting is California where Bernie is poised to WIN.  That will be his ticket to go all the way to the convention.

So sad that this is happening to her again....back in 08 she was unable to go all the way...but Bernie WILL.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on April 20, 2016, 10:15:28 AM
Bernie should come within 8 points behind clinton in New York----effectively keeping his momentum strong and she still wont have enough pledged delegates to beat him.

Except that she won by 15 points.

Poised to win in CA? Where are you getting that? Every single poll shows her winning by 6-14 points.

No, it's over for Sanders. He can't accumulate enough delegates at this point. He would have to win every single remaining primary by close to 100% to even have a chance. Not gonna happen. And this isn't just my opinion, it's math.

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on April 21, 2016, 01:30:52 PM
I dont mean to be cynical toward you hillary clinton supporters but Bernie Sanders did very well in New York --he bested Barack Obama's showing and he is poised to take California...
Bernie is stocking up on delegates as well.

Plus, I can't wait to hear the news after the FBI bring her associates and then herself for questioning...er for her FBI "review".

Just wanted to remind folks about that primary.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on April 21, 2016, 02:11:05 PM
...and he is poised to take California...

Evidence? Otherwise, you're just making stuff up.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on April 21, 2016, 03:39:26 PM
Like the FBI investigation. It's in periodicals. And you know, like the FBI interrogations for huma, cherryl and jake...which you can get from periodicals... I'm not wrong😉

Sanders is seriously poised to WIN California.

And if you understand politics you know sanders campaign is highly aware of FBI investigation and WILL NOT get out of the race until that is resolved.

Sorry Charlie...fbi trumps politics and you could research it yourself with 527 periodicals
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on April 21, 2016, 03:55:32 PM
...and he is poised to take California...

Evidence? Otherwise, you're just making stuff up.

Of course he's making stuff up.

Stop feeding the troll. Did you think it would be different this time? ;)
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on April 21, 2016, 09:51:33 PM
...and he is poised to take California...

Evidence? Otherwise, you're just making stuff up.

Of course he's making stuff up.

Stop feeding the troll. Did you think it would be different this time? ;)

What can I say? I always see the best in trolls!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on April 22, 2016, 07:16:43 AM
Not that it makes a difference but one might say that some you are acting like trolls.😉  check yourselves.

Here is a hint..independents vote in California... Bernie is poised to win it...check out the poll numbers in depth.  You'll catch on.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on April 22, 2016, 07:21:05 AM
Sanders campaign eyes this as a full run--they are INDEED watching what the FBi is doing

Dont think for a moment that they are not!!!!

Any trolls care to refute this?????

Lmao

This has been a thrilling past couple of months. Pop pop pop
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on April 23, 2016, 08:30:50 AM
California helped George McGovern stay in the race back in 1972 and California will keep bernie in the race as well...

So clinton fans you have to wait until California independents cast their vote. 

lol...that's in June!

Hillary WILL lose that state.

...but the FBI May put her campaign to bed earlier than that.

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on April 23, 2016, 04:13:10 PM
...and he is poised to take California...

Evidence? Otherwise, you're just making stuff up.



Did you find that evidence you were looking for regarding bernie being poised to win California?

Because it is there.

Or are you going to be silent now that you find I was correct?

Maintain, I think you will be silent now. ;)

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on April 23, 2016, 04:15:38 PM
...and he is poised to take California...

Evidence? Otherwise, you're just making stuff up.



Did you find that evidence you were looking for regarding bernie being poised to win California?

Because it is there.

Or are you going to be silent now that you find I was correct?

Maintain, I think you will be silent now. ;)

When the FBI comes out with evidence of clintons wrongdoing will you still be saying that I'm making stuff up?

I wonder? :)
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on April 27, 2016, 08:06:00 AM
So Hillary destroyed sanders in Connecticut....wasnt even close.

And she beat him in Rhode Island

Us Bernie getting out of the race?


Lmao!!!

Nope.

See you in June in California.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on April 27, 2016, 07:19:03 PM
welcome to the Democratic fracture


Sanders does exceptionally well in states where independents can vote.  He won Rhode Island.   Also, as evidenced by Maryland's primary Bernie won voters under 30--in fact he crushed her among this age group by about 73%.

Those who have no trust in the present "establishment" Democratic Party coupled with young voters who have little or no history with the Democratic Party and their agent, hillary clinton are those who vote for bernie--I love it,,,,,,"agent".

Read this carefully...there are NO alternatives or secondary candidates who will adequately replace Sanders and what he represents.  Hillary is out of luck with independents.

Many in the Democratic Party are going to wake up in a month or two and realize that their candidate is the target of a criminal investigation and awaits a similar fate to that of Richard Nixon. 

But it'll be too late. ;)



Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on April 28, 2016, 09:25:57 AM
Damn, I'm running out of popcorn.🎆🎇🎆🎇

Lmao😉
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on April 29, 2016, 08:21:24 AM
36095💜

...I vote as an independent in California and Bernie WILL win in California.

20% of dems will vote and ALL independents in June.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on May 01, 2016, 01:44:26 PM
Anyone who wishes to vote for Bernie Sanders in  CALIFORNIA might want to shift their independent status to Democrat because the DNC and Debbie Wasserman Shultz has been pushing to keep independents out of the vote!!!!

I don't think they can make it a "closed" election at this point but just to be sure be careful!!!

Don't be fooled by dnc agents who are trying to tell you that you can't vote.....YOU CAN!!!

Bernie will be winning more states as we approach california so make sure you get out there.

Bernie will win California but we need all supporters involved.

...he is poised to win there so let's give him the 10% margin he needs?

That's it!

Thank you and keep watching for the FBI interviews "interrogations"
They can't keep all of it secret.

Pop pop pop
YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN ;)
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on May 01, 2016, 01:47:30 PM
I think Debbie Wasserman Shultz is great because she is stupid and her interviews on tv help expose the corruption of the clinton organization and she digs hillary deeper into untrustworthiness.

Thus, Bernie's advantage.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on May 01, 2016, 01:49:29 PM
Lol...

let's be real, hillary bought her own political demise a long time ago.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on May 01, 2016, 02:11:54 PM
36767

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on May 01, 2016, 07:32:29 PM
“She will need super delegates to take her over the top of the convention in Philadelphia. In other words, the convention will be a contested contest,”

Well, well, well there you go Hillary Clinton fans---Bernie just said this so I think we all should take a deep breath and realize that this primary season is just getting better every day.

He is not getting out of the race. PERIOD!

...Oh, yeah and my sources are out there--just do a little work and look it up yourself.   8)
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on May 01, 2016, 07:41:02 PM
Btw.  If we were still able to go back and edit our posts I would bot post as much.  My spelling would be better and pilunctyatio---lol






Omg!!!!

Bernie sanders is now poised to win the great state of Indiana-amazing!!!!!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on May 01, 2016, 09:23:59 PM
How fun is it to read the wall st journal fawn over trumps 15point lead--on and on and on and on and on and on and then 1 paragraph about sanders getting ready to WIN in Indiana-- shshshshshshhsh!

Dont tell anyone.

Mainstream newspapers better keep a lid on this--especially Ny times--

Dont talk about bernie whatever you do.

He still is going to win Indiana at tho point--open election--even Republicans can vote for bernie--and they will. Lmao!!

Feel the Bern!!!!


SHOCKER!!!!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on May 03, 2016, 02:48:00 PM
If Bernie had Clintons artificial super delegates. She would demand to stay in the race even though there would be no way for her to catch up with him.

So, on to California after bernies victory in Indiana...

Hell, Clinton may even lose some of her firewall states to bernie--eg west Virginia.

Oh yeah, and California will be the bigger win for Bernie.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on May 03, 2016, 07:58:54 PM
Bernie WON Indiana!!!!!

BERNIE WILL WIN CALIFORNIA.....

Just like I have been saying!!!

FBI is chipping away at Clintons trust.

Plus Bernie is the favored candidate
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on May 05, 2016, 08:43:10 PM
You know what, I got that wrong.  Huma was not called in tuesday this week to interview with the FBI."


Huma was called in to interview for a position at FBI on Thursday

Hillary is telling folks that she too is interviewing for a job at the FBI.

I would truly enjoy a photograph of her face right after she comes out of her interrogation-- I mean, interview, or musical review or whatever else shes calling it.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on May 07, 2016, 02:09:54 PM
Criminal Inquiry Sought in Hillary Clinton’s Use of Email--July, 23, 2015

WASHINGTON — Two inspectors general have asked the Justice Department to open an investigation into whether sensitive government information was mishandled in connection with the personal email account Hillary Rodham Clinton used as secretary of state, senior government officials said Thursday.

...a periodical


The times got it right!!!!!

then Nixon called on the CIA to stop the FBIs watergate investigation-- but they
Didn't





The Hillary Clinton campaign sent a nearly 2,000-word letter to the executive editor of The New York Times this week expressing "grave concern" with a recent and controversial report relating to the former Secretary of State's private email account.


The clinton campaign was doomed from that article up til today.

Now mrs Clinton will be interrogated----LAST!

She's the target.



Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on May 09, 2016, 01:37:45 PM
Donald Trump, who has the backing of many Democrats is already systematically taking apart Hillary Clinton and as polls suggest will beat her in the general election.

Hillary Clinton will most likely NOT be the nominee for the democrats because of her FBI criminal investigation.

This will be obvious within 10 days when we get a photo opportunity after or before she goes in for her police questioning---her lawyer, David will be present to coach her--- but it is really almost over her.

I'm looking at May 11th but at least 23rd for that to happen. 

The Clinton want this to happen before memorial day.

We shall see.

Apparently, the evidence Brian Pagliano and Huma Weiner have provided is overwhelming.

Simply put, from the beginning of hillarys time at the State Department she set up her own illegal back channels for her daily correspondence and foundation dealings to circumvent government records laws. 


Unironically, her incompetence in Benghazi exposed her whole system of foundation work off the books and top secret information mishandling, destruction and spillage.


Wow!!!!!!

Hillary is toast.
Bernie will be our candidate for the Whitehouse along with trump.

More popcorn anyone?????

POP, POP, and DRIP, DRIP.

Pay attention future lawyers😉🎇🎆
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on May 09, 2016, 01:42:24 PM
Friday may 27, or Monday may 30.

Not sure the FBI will wait for her campaign to get there.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on May 09, 2016, 01:53:46 PM
Prediction---

Bernie sanders will win West Virginia, Kentucky and Oregon.

Sorry, Hillary fans

It's called momentum!!!!!


...then


38167
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on May 09, 2016, 03:22:14 PM
As usual, you don't let pesky facts get in the way of your wishful thinking.

1) Polls indicate that Clinton will obliterate Trump in November. One poll, ONE, by Rasmussen shows Trump ahead by 2 points. Every other poll ever conducted shows Clinton ahead by as much as 13 points.

No matter how unpopular HRC is, Trump is doomed with women and minorities. He can't win without them, thus he can't win. You cannot provide data to refute that fact, can you?

2) Abedin has not even been questioned.
3) No date has been set for HRC to be questioned. You're making stuff up again.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on May 10, 2016, 07:44:25 AM
As usual, you don't let pesky facts get in the way of your wishful thinking.

1) Polls indicate that Clinton will obliterate Trump in November. One poll, ONE, by Rasmussen shows Trump ahead by 2 points. Every other poll ever conducted shows Clinton ahead by as much as 13 points.

No matter how unpopular HRC is, Trump is doomed with women and minorities. He can't win without them, thus he can't win. You cannot provide data to refute that fact, can you?

2) Abedin has not even been questioned.
3) No date has been set for HRC to be questioned. You're making stuff up again.

Dude, he's always making stuff up. The only thing you know for sure is that if he says it, it will be wrong.

Source- a periodical.

Stop feeding the troll.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on May 10, 2016, 02:19:55 PM
As usual, you don't let pesky facts get in the way of your wishful thinking.

1) Polls indicate that Clinton will obliterate Trump in November. One poll, ONE, by Rasmussen shows Trump ahead by 2 points. Every other poll ever conducted shows Clinton ahead by as much as 13 points.

No matter how unpopular HRC is, Trump is doomed with women and minorities. He can't win without them, thus he can't win. You cannot provide data to refute that fact, can you?

2) Abedin has not even been questioned.
3) No date has been set for HRC to be questioned. You're making stuff up again.

I'm sure you are a well meaning person but you might want to research on your own.

Do this: Search google--trust me its easy--Huma Weiner or Abadin then type in FBI.

You'll find plenty of info.😉

Start with that, then we'll chat.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on May 10, 2016, 02:24:51 PM
As usual, you don't let pesky facts get in the way of your wishful thinking.

1) Polls indicate that Clinton will obliterate Trump in November. One poll, ONE, by Rasmussen shows Trump ahead by 2 points. Every other poll ever conducted shows Clinton ahead by as much as 13 points.

No matter how unpopular HRC is, Trump is doomed with women and minorities. He can't win without them, thus he can't win. You cannot provide data to refute that fact, can you?

2) Abedin has not even been questioned.
3) No date has been set for HRC to be questioned. You're making stuff up again.

Dude, he's always making stuff up. The only thing you know for sure is that if he says it, it will be wrong.

Source- a periodical.

Stop feeding the troll.

You have no credibility, and look in the mirror regarding trolls.

Btw sanders will win west Virginia today.  You will find that prediction to materialize...but you live in a fantasy world and of course will not admit that I am right even after you read about it in a periodical on Wednesday.

Now get Lost dum dum.

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on May 10, 2016, 03:27:11 PM
Like it or not Clinton jeopardized national security--even if she gets the nomination she will NEVER be able to beat trump.

She will be hammered for serious lack of judgement and incompetence.  Compound that with no enthusiasm, those who are voting Bernie for president regardless of the outcome and Trumps circus like enthusiasm.

She Ain't gonna make it.

Plus pretend there is no fbi investigation if that makes you happy.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on May 10, 2016, 03:31:58 PM
Dont be mistaken for one moment that the Republican party wont embrace Trump.

They will.

They will ALL come out to vote against Hillary.

Dont believe me?

You would be a fool not to grasp  this
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on May 10, 2016, 05:52:55 PM
"Zero facts, only opinions."

A periodical
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on May 10, 2016, 07:23:26 PM
Trump is down to the final lap
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on May 12, 2016, 09:31:24 AM
"Zero facts, only opinions."

A periodical

So fact.....bernie won west Virginia
So fact.....cherryl mills, (hillarys lawyer) walked out of her FBI interrogation

So fact.....huma Weiner has been interrogated by FBI

So fact... FBI director just confirmed that the FBI is conducting a criminal investigation

NOT a musical review nor a security inquiry.

The FB of Investigation is dealing with criminal activity.

Just the facts maintain

Your girl Hillary ain't gonna make it.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on May 12, 2016, 08:38:12 PM

Dear Mrs. Hillary Clinton,

We know,
You had something to hide
Should have hidden it, shouldn't you
Now you're not satisfied
With what you're being put through

It's just time to pay the price
For not listening to advice
And deciding in your youth
On the policy of truth

Things could be so different now
It used to be so civilised
You will always wonder how
It could have been if you'd only lied

It's too late to change events
It's time to face the consequence
For delivering the proof
In the policy of truth

Never again
Is what you swore
The time before
Never again
Is what you swore
The time before

Now you're standing there tongue tied
You'd better learn your lesson well
Hide what you have to hide
And tell what you have to tell
You'll see your problems multiplied
If you continually decide
To faithfully pursue
The policy of truth

Never again
Is what you swore
The time before

Depeche Mode
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on May 12, 2016, 08:48:57 PM
Funny, president Obama glossed over a few surreptitious events in his presidency with a "no big deal" explanation for them.  Or downplaying the cause-effects disproportional results and counter intuitive outcome.

He bluffed about some and committed on others.

With Mrs. Clinton his bluff has been called.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on May 15, 2016, 11:38:42 PM
Hillary Clinton will most likely be blaming "the bureaucracy" for "nebulous", "interpretive" and "counterintuitive guidelines" for her upcoming legal problems.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on May 15, 2016, 11:42:37 PM
Is it good enough?

Will we get that post-FBI interrogation photo-op?

Here is a big bag of blue corn kernels  🌽 ready to pop 🎆🎇🎆🎇

Can't wait...coughing anyone? Contradictions?
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on May 16, 2016, 02:06:49 PM

No matter how unpopular HRC is, Trump is doomed with women and minorities. He can't win without them, thus he can't win. You cannot provide data to refute that fact, can you?



I love when people are too misogynist and racist to even come close to realizing how misogynist and racist the things that spew out of them are..............THIS is one of those moments..............adding the spice of self righteousness just makes it worse, but good luck explaining that to said people. "I know minorities and women better than minorities and women, and they WILL be pigeon holed by what I think of them"
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on May 16, 2016, 06:33:21 PM
My statement isn't based on a preconceived notion of how I think women and minorities view Trump, it's based on polling data. The guy is absolutely tanking with both groups, especially women. His numbers are way lower than any previous Republican candidate.

If you have any actual data to refute me, go for it. Otherwise you're just making stuff up.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on May 17, 2016, 04:16:20 PM
My statement isn't based on a preconceived notion of how I think women and minorities view Trump, it's based on polling data. The guy is absolutely tanking with both groups, especially women. His numbers are way lower than any previous Republican candidate.

If you have any actual data to refute me, go for it. Otherwise you're just making stuff up.
That's the math bigots use.......BLM told me.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on May 17, 2016, 10:39:33 PM
That's the math bigots use.......BLM told me.

Sure, blame it on the Bureau of Land Management. 
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on May 18, 2016, 08:20:34 AM
The group Correct The Record and its logic challenged crayon user David Brock will be an irrelevant blog by July.

They have been rendered ineffectual.

Mrs Hillary is going to be like Richard Millhouse Nixon....finished
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on May 18, 2016, 08:25:10 AM
I'm always suspicious of people who use words like "minorities"...

Irish, welsh and Icelandic people are minorities by the bigoted definition of our "social construct"--minority mentality.

But maintain means well.
She doesn't get that women and Spanish speaking people do like trump as well....strange as some would think.

But trump cant beat Bernie. He will defeat Clinton that's why Republicans want her to be the nominee.



She
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on May 18, 2016, 08:29:06 AM
For the record until blm recocnizes that more B.L. Kill more B.L. than cops kill B.L-----the movement tends to limp along and appear disingenuous.  Sorry.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on May 18, 2016, 08:35:32 AM
I'm always suspicious of people who use words like "minorities"...

Irish, welsh and Icelandic people are minorities by the bigoted definition of our "social construct"--minority mentality.

But maintain means well.
She doesn't get that women and Spanish speaking people do like trump as well....strange as some would think.

But trump cant beat Bernie. He will defeat Clinton that's why Republicans want her to be the nominee.



She

Classic ad hominum fallacy. You guys crack me up. Yes of course, only a closet racist would dare believe that a guy who insults minorities (the term is accurate) and women would do poorly with those demographics.

Latest data: Trump gets 16% of AA votes, 28% of Latinos, and 38% of women. It is literally impossible to win with those numbers.   
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on May 19, 2016, 08:01:19 AM
I'm suspicious of people's agenda who argue using passe and bigoted terms like "minorities"

If you believe there are "minorities" than you have to acknowledge all minorities like Icelandic Americans

You just said that trump has support from Spanish speaking people and women.  Regardless of the percent--it is still support.

Enthusiasm leading to turn out wins elections..

Like it or not trump and Bernie have both.  Clinton is winding down.

Again. Sorry.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on May 19, 2016, 09:33:45 AM
Wwelcome to the democratic party FRACTURE

Sanders will win California by about 10% and Clinton will still not have enough pledged delegates to win the nomination.

So, the Nevada problem shows that discontent with how the democratic party machine has been in the tank for Clinton is unravelling.

Barbara boxer booed off stage was priceless...she is a bought paid for tool of politics...funny to see her booed.

But I digress

Bernie supporters will write in his name no matter what if Clinton gets the nomination.

The democratic party should see bernies popularity and momentum if they are wise and want to win.

Otherwise it will be president trump.
Count on it!!!!!!!!!!!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on May 19, 2016, 10:58:04 AM
If you believe there are "minorities" than you have to acknowledge all minorities like Icelandic Americans

Icelandic Americans benefit from Viking Privilege. You're so racist.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on May 19, 2016, 01:32:12 PM
If you believe there are "minorities" than you have to acknowledge all minorities like Icelandic Americans

Icelandic Americans benefit from Viking Privilege. You're so racist.


Lol. Still a minority, sorry.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on May 20, 2016, 07:57:35 AM
Sorry I couldn't respond with more explanation as it was a busy day--"viking privilege"--that was funny.

But, maintain, when i read vague outdated terms which also have nebulous definitions like the word "minorities" I have to think there is serious prejudice, presuppositions, or tacit bigotry.

I dont think you mean what your writing expresses. Demographics are tricky to discuss without offending individuals.  One example- Latinos cannot be lumped into one political voting block because depending on MANY factors they vote all across the political spectrum.

To brush swaths of people off as minorities sounds disingenuous and somewhat demeaning.

Do you see?

Btw....have you seen some of the new polls out where Mr. Drumpf is ahead of Hillary on the national level?....maintain? If Hillary Clinton is the favored candidate to soooooo many people and the optimum choice for president how is it that she is NOT way a head of Drumpf?????

If he is so despised among women...etc then how is he now even close to her in the polls?
Please explain that one?

And bernie is clearly beating Drumpf in national polls???

Please explain your thoughts on that one? If you can?
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on May 24, 2016, 08:58:33 PM
I love how easy it is to trick stupid people into doing what you want them to do.
Point out that a guy hates illegal immigration, point to that being mostly Mexicans, and then convince virtually all Multi Generational American Born, not even from Mexico Hispanics to be opposed to him, as if its Puerto Ricans interest to keep Mexicans in here illegally..........genius.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on May 25, 2016, 04:56:16 PM
Wow!!!

Hillary Clinton's OWN state department inspector general just ratted her out with regard to her mishandling of government information....hackers? Oh,my yes.

It does not look good for her political career at this point.

--Very interested to see  how the cops...er the FBI view her actions.

This election season is getting more interesting week by week.

To think it all started with a cable requesting "help" "assistance" " security"---that never received ANY attention and was left to neglect.

The American people need their president to OPEN and READ all of his cables.  To not say aloud that "you take action"...
We need our president to simply "take it".  And for gods sake we need our president to seriously understand and protect national secrets.

Mrs. Hillary may take her past political posts for granted but I bet the FBI doesn't.

-------more popcorn!!!!
-------pop pop pop!!!!!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on May 27, 2016, 11:59:23 PM
Mrs. Hillary may take her past political posts for granted but im sure the average american, myself don't. And i bet the FBI doesn't.



Memorial day weekend....hmmmm???

What day this weekend would be good for an interrogation?  I mean what day would be good for a review.














Just a though.........

Oh, to be the ones who actually get to ask Hillary some questions.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on May 28, 2016, 09:34:33 AM
For the 100 or so people who read this thread everyday or so.....

What Hillary Clinton supporters don't seem to understand and what many of us Bernie sanders supporters absolutely grasp is an honest reality.

A politician may be able to lie to the average voter without repercussions however lying to the cops ALWAYS carries SERIOUS consequences.

Many examples exist where a pathological liar gets themselves caught---
One pathological liar named Martha Stewart could help herself either.

Hillary Clinton supporters--I know you are dying a little inside every day because some of you are not duped....and know she is not going to make it.

Bernie does not need to even mention hillarys damn emails---we all know now the FBI means business---

Toughy tough lawyer Cheryl Mills had to run out of the room crying when the FBI questioning began..

Bernie fans....lets butter some more popcorn!!!!!!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on June 02, 2016, 08:19:20 AM
If you believe there are "minorities" than you have to acknowledge all minorities like Icelandic Americans

Icelandic Americans benefit from Viking Privilege. You're so racist.

Maintain,

Do you see how your friend Hillary Clinton is about to be indicted?

You, maintain are at that point where you have lost the argument.

Using words like "minority" as you did erroded your credibility-- its a bigoted term.

I think the facts and evidence regarding Hillary Clinton's impending collapse will sufficiently keep you out of the conversation.

Do let me know when you decide to support Bernie sanders and we will then be united!!!

Good luck to you.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on June 02, 2016, 08:24:13 AM
Prediction: Bernie wins california by 10%  and bernie wins new jersey by 1 or 2 percent--NJ will be close but a victory nonetheless for Bernie.

FBI interrogation next week--Wednesday or Thursday for Mrs. Hillary.😉


Blue corn popcorn bag........yummy!!!

Yum yum yum
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on June 02, 2016, 11:40:06 AM
So if it's Trump vs Clinton, who will you vote for?
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on June 06, 2016, 01:31:48 PM
So if it's Trump vs Clinton, who will you vote for?

Hillary is a compromised candidate and Bernie sanders is the only viable solution. I, along with many others are voting for Bernie sanders. 
So, between trump vs joe biden--it will be for Sanders I vote
So, between trump vs gore--it will be Sanders I vote.

I think even a bigot could understand that...get it now, maintain.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on June 06, 2016, 10:36:32 PM
You're voting for Trump. It's obvious.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on June 08, 2016, 06:00:27 AM
You're voting for Trump. It's obvious.

I think stupidity, and dimwittedness, are more obvious in your understanding of politics and Bernie sanders supporters.

Some of us will vote for Jill Stein and many of us will be voting for Bernie sanders.  That is politics.

Neither Clinton nor sanders have enough pledged delegates to be called the nominee for the democrats.  Also, the FBI have to bring Hillary in for questioning.
So, the nominating process will continue to the convention.  Understanding that will bring you closer to Jesus.  And we all know bigots need a little Jesus. A gift for you and your mind to ponder.

With Clinton on the verge of indictment and all polls pointing to a decisive sanders victory over trump and a Clinton loss to trump in the general election makes any vote for Clinton a Win for Donald trump.

Sorry ,maintain we are going to be watching this democratic fracture go all the way to the convention.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on June 08, 2016, 09:37:12 AM
After a year of trolling, and being wrong, I take comfort in knowing that CS will continue to troll and be wrong.

Seriously- look at his posting history. He's never been right, and every single time, he doubles down on being wrong. Please, go to a website where everyone doesn't already know what a pathetic loser you are.


Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on June 08, 2016, 11:22:49 AM
Cinnamon, it's just too easy.

I said a while back that once Sanders officially lost you'd go from "Sanders is poised to win!" to "She'll be indicted!". Sure enough, on cue, you've pivoted to your next BS claims. You have been wrong literally every single time.

It's not going to the convention. Sanders will drop out soon.

Go cry in your popcorn. 
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on June 08, 2016, 02:33:36 PM
After a year of trolling, and being wrong, I take comfort in knowing that CS will continue to troll and be wrong.

Seriously- look at his posting history. He's never been right, and every single time, he doubles down on being wrong. Please, go to a website where everyone doesn't already know what a pathetic loser you are.


Oh lol its poodleboy back with a little p.e. Problem.

There are still more votes to be cast and some votes dont come until the convention--- too early. The primary is not over until convention in July....then come back and we talk then....fbi still investigating her criminal mishandling of classified info.

Some of us got more popcorn for that.  I'm laughing at you that you think the FBI will bus go away.

Pop pop pop!

Sanders already said that he is finishing this puppy and I take him at his word that he is going to bring this all the way to the convention based on Sanders convictions.

Or do you think he has been lying about that?

Besides you
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on June 08, 2016, 02:38:02 PM
 would enjoy the popcorn if you only understood that the FBI investigate crime.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on June 09, 2016, 07:45:24 AM
President Nixon responded by refusing to release the tapes, claiming that his conversations were private and hence protected from forced disclosure by the doctrine of executive privilege-a concept which permits officers of the executive branch to maintain a level of privacy to promote open and vigorous debate. In his refusal, Nixon stated unequivocally that the tapes were “entirely consistent with what I have stated to be the truth.”

This confrontation set the stage for the United States v. Nixon, in which the Court ruled unanimously that President Nixon must turn over the tapes
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on June 09, 2016, 08:01:37 AM
Cinnamon, it's just too easy.

I said a while back that once Sanders officially lost you'd go from "Sanders is poised to win!" to "She'll be indicted!". Sure enough, on cue, you've pivoted to your next BS claims. You have been wrong literally every single time.

It's not going to the convention. Sanders will drop out soon.

Go cry in your popcorn.

The point you miss is the fact that Clinton does not have enough pledged delegates to win outright-- she still needs super delegates to get her there, understand? 

She is also under criminal investigation.

Two problems for her that will keep Bernie supporters on track to write him in as the democratic choice for president...effectively she has sullied and blurred a definitive victory for herself. 

Donald trump will be the nominee for the republicans--definitive

We still dont know about hillary--she may get arrested--that has been looming over her since she got busted squirrling away top secret documents.

A vote for her has always been a vote for trump--she can't beat a populist who has her constituents voting for him.

Bernie sanders populist charge can beat trump.

You just dont understand politics.

Maintain, go back and be honest and see how many states I got right.
You'll find that with most I was correct.😉

It is June 9 and Hillary is still not the official nominee.  Face the facts.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on June 09, 2016, 08:22:50 AM
I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email,” Mrs. Clinton said at a news conference on Tuesday at the United Nations. “I’m certainly well aware of the classification requirements and did not send classified material.”

So, the facts which Mrs. Clinton believes didn't ring true. 
And now she is currently under criminal investigation by the FBI.

Mrs. Clinton should take a lesson from Mr. Nixon.  She can run fir office all she wants--but she can't hide.

For those of you who have been following this thread--that has been the crux of this race since last June.

We are still going
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on June 09, 2016, 09:35:29 AM
When the FBI recommends indictment for Mrs. Clinton the DOJ should put a special prosecutor on the case-- this way Mr. Nixon--I mean Mrs. Clinton can continue to be a nominee until she is replaced.

Yes Hillary Clinton supporters tho will NOT go away.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on June 09, 2016, 09:36:50 AM
..like the Valerie plame case--but this time-- we know the culpable parties already.😉😊
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on June 09, 2016, 12:35:30 PM
..like the Valerie plame case--but this time-- we know the culpable parties already.😉😊

Breaking news! Dumb troll still unable to see the obvious; doesn't realize that people are laughing at, not with, him.

Source- A periodical.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on June 09, 2016, 01:34:35 PM
..like the Valerie plame case--but this time-- we know the culpable parties already.😉😊

Breaking news! Dumb troll still unable to see the obvious; doesn't realize that people are laughing at, not with, him.

Source- A periodical.

Lol, no body is laughing at me but I have been laughing at your stupidity and naïveté for quite some time now, poodleboy.

Answer this question.

Did Bernie sanders concede the race today or did he say he is continuing to run at least until there is a real winner.  You know, at the convention-----

Like he had been saying all along.

See, we like sanders because he means what he says--Hillary Clinton supporters who seem to be trying to elect trump with their damaged candidate dont know anything about telling the truth---

Sorry, lol- you are WRONG again---

Why? Because you are stupid----

Rutgers law has more opportunity than BLS?????? You are a moron in more ways than one--

read bernies words and NO concession speech----that says it all

Tell you what--- when Hillary goes for her interrogation for the FBI check back with me...ok? Pookie?
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on June 10, 2016, 11:24:44 AM
Hey Cinnamon, remember when you said Sanders was "poised to win California"? That was funny.

The Bernie supporters (and I actually like Sanders more than HRC on a personal level, believe it or not) seem to ignore the fact that HRC got almost 4 million more votes than Sanders. Even if there were no such thing as super delegates, she'd win. The Sanders supporters and Trump supporters do have one thing in common: they are both prone to BS conspiracy theories. It's not rigged, there is no suppression, she simply got more votes because she's mainstream and Sanders is fringe.

At this point, the cake is baked. Sanders looks like a grumpy sore loser and his crowd sounds like a bunch of whiny children. He ran, he lost. Get over it. 
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on June 13, 2016, 08:04:42 AM
Neither Hillary Clinton nor Bernie sanders have enough pledged delegates ( by democratic rules) to clinch the nomination-- that is a fact. The convention is where the extra delegates are awarded.

Bernie sanders has said that he will take his populist message( which has been seriously subverted-with debate scheduling to media efforts to call the race early for example-- that is fact--I watched one of those Saturday night debates--prime time???

Hillary Clinton and the democratic establishment are a major part of the problem which bernies populist message is trying to correct.

He will continue to have supporters ALL the way to November because its not unity of a party we want--

IT IS CHANGE

The democratic establishment as exemplified by Wasserman Shultz tried to blunt and discredit Bernie sanders campaign-- that is a fact

Elizabeth Warren gives a speech AGAINST everything Hillary Clinton and her big bank fat cat campaign is for--and is hypocritically supporting her???? No Good!

So, hrc fans like you, maintain--are going to have to suckit up!

The suspect, Hillary Clinton will not get a majority of Bernie supporters behind her no matter what anyone says at this point-- get used to it.

Hillary supporters dont seem to realize that trump can beat Hillary in the general election but Bernie will crush trump.

The democratic party has been fractured--officially much like the Republican party situation.

Try to honestly answer this question Maintain:

 When it is discovered that the FBI will be calling for action to be taken upon Clinton will you get behind Bernie sanders, then????

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on June 13, 2016, 07:00:20 PM
President Nixon responded by refusing to release the tapes, claiming that his conversations were private and hence protected from forced disclosure by the doctrine of executive privilege-a concept which permits officers of the executive branch to maintain a level of privacy to promote open and vigorous debate. In his refusal, Nixon stated unequivocally that the tapes were “entirely consistent with what I have stated to be the truth.”

This confrontation set the stage for the United States v. Nixon, in which the Court ruled unanimously that President Nixon must turn over the tapes
which has jack to do with Hillary.................tell the truth, you are a 1L who is dead center in class rankings ain't ya there boy??
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on June 14, 2016, 07:54:09 AM
which has jack to do with Hillary.................tell the truth, you are a 1L who is dead center in class rankings ain't ya there boy??

You're kidding, right? Cinnamon Troll is some old guy who has probably been banned from numerous newspaper comment sections, and is too dumb to be allowed to comment on youtube and espn. 

Source- a periodical.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on June 16, 2016, 07:31:57 AM
Hey Cinnamon, remember when you said Sanders was "poised to win California"? That was funny.

The Bernie supporters (and I actually like Sanders more than HRC on a personal level, believe it or not) seem to ignore the fact that HRC got almost 4 million more votes than Sanders. Even if there were no such thing as super delegates, she'd win. The Sanders supporters and Trump supporters do have one thing in common: they are both prone to BS conspiracy theories. It's not rigged, there is no suppression, she simply got more votes because she's mainstream and Sanders is fringe.

At this point, the cake is baked. Sanders looks like a grumpy sore loser and his crowd sounds like a bunch of whiny children. He ran, he lost. Get over it.

Hey Maintain,

I told you that I will be voting for Bernie Sanders along with many Bernie supporters in November-- no matter what because to us supporting Hillary is a vote for Donald trump since she is being investigated by the cops.

Try to answer honestly, will you support Bernie sanders if Hillary has to drop out?????
I bet you can't answer the question.

Also, do you mean conspiracy theories like this one:

The investigation should go forward,” Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein told the Observer. “This is sort of typical Hillary Clinton; to do things that are not legal, to say that they are, and then try to cover them up. Hillary Clinton severely chastised other whistleblowers for using Internet channels that were not secure and yet she herself was doing that with private, high level state department information.”

A periodical
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on June 16, 2016, 07:38:04 AM
which has jack to do with Hillary.................tell the truth, you are a 1L who is dead center in class rankings ain't ya there boy??

You're kidding, right? Cinnamon Troll is some old guy who has probably been banned from numerous newspaper comment sections, and is too dumb to be allowed to comment on youtube and espn. 

Source- a periodical.

Lol---has Bernie sanders conceded the race to Hillary yet?

No? Ok, just checking.

In not the only one who is sure about Clintons legal problems...lolololol

The investigation should go forward,” Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein told the Observer. “This is sort of typical Hillary Clinton; to do things that are not legal, to say that they are, and then try to cover them up. Hillary Clinton severely chastised other whistleblowers for using Internet channels that were not secure and yet she herself was doing that with private, high level state department information.”

A periodical

I might as well be jill stein--we are talking about the same criminal investigation after all.

Hey, poodleboy--I think you are young, naive and misguided--that's all.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on June 16, 2016, 07:48:21 AM
President Nixon responded by refusing to release the tapes, claiming that his conversations were private and hence protected from forced disclosure by the doctrine of executive privilege-a concept which permits officers of the executive branch to maintain a level of privacy to promote open and vigorous debate. In his refusal, Nixon stated unequivocally that the tapes were “entirely consistent with what I have stated to be the truth.”

This confrontation set the stage for the United States v. Nixon, in which the Court ruled unanimously that President Nixon must turn over the tapes
which has jack to do with Hillary.................tell the truth, you are a 1L who is dead center in class rankings ain't ya there boy??

Nixon was elected to a second term but the FBI was investigating him and he tried to lie about it and cover it up just like hillary-- we see what happened to him.

The same thing is out in the open for her and she didn't want to give up her private conversations either--

What most folks dont get is that the FBI got a Republican--- they are career policemen and not politicians--what makes people think that the fbi wont take down a high profile Democrat???

If they don't prosecute her because she has clout and let the crime go there will be serious ramifications.

And I am not a 1l-- very funny though-graduated mcl.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on June 16, 2016, 09:04:51 AM
Hey Maintain,

I told you that I will be voting for Bernie Sanders along with many Bernie supporters in November-- no matter what because to us supporting Hillary is a vote for Donald trump since she is being investigated by the cops.

Try to answer honestly, will you support Bernie sanders if Hillary has to drop out?????
I bet you can't answer the question.

Also, do you mean conspiracy theories like this one:

The investigation should go forward,” Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein told the Observer. “This is sort of typical Hillary Clinton; to do things that are not legal, to say that they are, and then try to cover them up. Hillary Clinton severely chastised other whistleblowers for using Internet channels that were not secure and yet she herself was doing that with private, high level state department information.”

A periodical

Ok, I'll play.

Yes, if HRC drops out and Sanders is the nominee I will vote for Sanders. Why? Because although I disagree with both Clinton and Sanders on many issues, I am capable of recognizing that they are both infinitely better options than Trump.

See Cinnamon? This is what big kids do. They make big kid decisions. They recognize the reality of the situation and make the best choice possible under the circumstances.

The fact that you would write-in for Sanders because you can't draw a distinction between Clinton (who you don't like) and Trump (who you should be scared of) says a lot about your ability to reason. Your decision is clearly driven by emotion, not logic.

BTW, the meeting between Sanders and Clinton the other day was essentially him dropping out.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on June 16, 2016, 09:24:56 AM

BTW, the meeting between Sanders and Clinton the other day was essentially him dropping out.

As opposed to Clinton having a lead of 400 pledged delegates (that's without counting the 530 "super"delegate lead).
As opposed to the Sanders/Obama meeting, wherein Sanders exited saying that he'd help fight Trump, and Obama exited saying, "I'm with Hillary."
As opposed to the very few Democratic backers of Sanders now saying they are supporting Clinton?
As opposed to Sanders laying off more than half of his campaign staff?
As opposed to Clinton now running general election ads, and Sanders ... not?

But, sure, I guess we can look to what Jill Stein is saying.

This is why you can't engage with Cinnamon Troll. Normal people make rational observations based on facts, and then change them as the facts change. For example, I thought it was highly unlikely that Trump would win the GOP nomination, because I thought the GOP would unite against him. I began to change this opinion after South Carolina. As facts change, my opinion changes. It's called wearing big boy pants.

Others ... well, I am quite sure that if Clinton prevails in November, Cinnamon Troll will still be posting that he's hanging out in his underoos with popcorn ... just waiting for some shoe to drop because Nixon, or something.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on June 16, 2016, 09:59:04 AM
...and I would add that it's, well, amusing that someone keeps finding the same topic "popcorn worthy" in this election (remember- he had the popcorn ready for the Benghazi hearing), while ignoring a pretty amazing election that includes, inter alia-

1. A party's prior nominee in open warfare against their current nominee. Seriously, how amazing is the Romney/Trump split (putting Utah ... UTAH!!!! in play).

2. A sitting GOP senator saying that the GOP nominee is too bigoted and racist to be President (??? that's from Kirk, today).

3. The first-ever female presidential nominee from one of the big-two parties.

4. Having both candidates have unfavorable ratings that have never been recorded (seriously- Clinton would have serious difficulties, but for Trump).

5. The continuing and open question as to whether the GOP will revolt prior to, or during, Cleveland.

6. The open question as to whether events (the economy-Brexit, a terror attack, etc.) could substantially upset the race and ... we could actually have a President Trump.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on June 16, 2016, 01:48:46 PM
Hey Maintain,

I told you that I will be voting for Bernie Sanders along with many Bernie supporters in November-- no matter what because to us supporting Hillary is a vote for Donald trump since she is being investigated by the cops.

Try to answer honestly, will you support Bernie sanders if Hillary has to drop out?????
I bet you can't answer the question.

Also, do you mean conspiracy theories like this one:

The investigation should go forward,” Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein told the Observer. “This is sort of typical Hillary Clinton; to do things that are not legal, to say that they are, and then try to cover them up. Hillary Clinton severely chastised other whistleblowers for using Internet channels that were not secure and yet she herself was doing that with private, high level state department information.”

A periodical

Ok, I'll play.

Yes, if HRC drops out and Sanders is the nominee I will vote for Sanders. Why? Because although I disagree with both Clinton and Sanders on many issues, I am capable of recognizing that they are both infinitely better options than Trump.

See Cinnamon? This is what big kids do. They make big kid decisions. They recognize the reality of the situation and make the best choice possible under the circumstances.

The fact that you would write-in for Sanders because you can't draw a distinction between Clinton (who you don't like) and Trump (who you should be scared of) says a lot about your ability to reason. Your decision is clearly driven by emotion, not logic.

BTW, the meeting between Sanders and Clinton the other day was essentially him dropping out.

Good. I thought you ONLY liked Clinton....which you do-but u are cerebral enough to realize that she may have to drop out because of an indictment.

I will not vote for trump--not scared at all because he is anti-Republican party--anti establishment--that is enough to mess them up for a while.

Now Bernie WILL get my vote because i vote on principle and agenda--Bernie is also anti- establishment.

Clinton could go to jail--and has a sordid history--she would never ever get my vote.......and heavy establishment figure--3 strikes, the biggest one being the police investigating her----

Fun to watch!!!

So, many of us Bernie supporters don't want democratic unity--

We want change-- Bernie brings that...

And many of us will vote for jill stein...also, anti establishment.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on June 16, 2016, 01:50:28 PM
...and I would add that it's, well, amusing that someone keeps finding the same topic "popcorn worthy" in this election (remember- he had the popcorn ready for the Benghazi hearing), while ignoring a pretty amazing election that includes, inter alia-

1. A party's prior nominee in open warfare against their current nominee. Seriously, how amazing is the Romney/Trump split (putting Utah ... UTAH!!!! in play).

2. A sitting GOP senator saying that the GOP nominee is too bigoted and racist to be President (??? that's from Kirk, today).

3. The first-ever female presidential nominee from one of the big-two parties.

4. Having both candidates have unfavorable ratings that have never been recorded (seriously- Clinton would have serious difficulties, but for Trump).

5. The continuing and open question as to whether the GOP will revolt prior to, or during, Cleveland.

6. The open question as to whether events (the economy-Brexit, a terror attack, etc.) could substantially upset the race and ... we could actually have a President Trump.

You poor little establishment gremlin, awwwww.

7. FBI investigation
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on June 16, 2016, 01:53:14 PM
U could look at what Jill stein says.....

Same thing in saying, lol!!!!

Still exciting......

Pop pop pop

Russian hackers anyone?
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on June 16, 2016, 02:47:43 PM


And many of us will vote for jill stein...also, anti establishment.

Doesn't some other village need an idiot?
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on June 16, 2016, 05:32:35 PM
...and I would add that it's, well, amusing that someone keeps finding the same topic "popcorn worthy" in this election (remember- he had the popcorn ready for the Benghazi hearing), while ignoring a pretty amazing election that includes, inter alia-

1. A party's prior nominee in open warfare against their current nominee. Seriously, how amazing is the Romney/Trump split (putting Utah ... UTAH!!!! in play).

2. A sitting GOP senator saying that the GOP nominee is too bigoted and racist to be President (??? that's from Kirk, today).

3. The first-ever female presidential nominee from one of the big-two parties.

4. Having both candidates have unfavorable ratings that have never been recorded (seriously- Clinton would have serious difficulties, but for Trump).

5. The continuing and open question as to whether the GOP will revolt prior to, or during, Cleveland.

6. The open question as to whether events (the economy-Brexit, a terror attack, etc.) could substantially upset the race and ... we could actually have a President Trump.

All of the above, and more. Yes, I agree completely.

It is an incredible election, and has exposed so many fractures within the system.

This is probably a somewhat predictable response, but this Trump phenomenon demonstrates how wrong the pundits and party leaders have been at reading the tea leaves. There has been a seething anger building for a long, long time, and I think it's too simplistic to just chalk it up to racism. That certainly is the animating force for some Trump voters, but there's something else going on. There's a strong desire to burn the SOB down, start over.

So here's my question:

Let's assume that HRC wins. If she beats Trump, who is anathema to so many voters, by only say, five points, does that mean that a less Trump-y type of anti-establishment candidate would have smoked her? I mean, when you look at Trump it's hard to believe that she's not ahead by 25 (which could happen, maybe).

Further, and more importantly, does that mean that the Democrats now have to find a way to deal with the fact that nearly half the electorate is willing to go for something radically different? I think it legitimately calls into question the assumption of a permanent Democratic majority based on future demographics.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on June 17, 2016, 07:07:21 AM

So here's my question:

Let's assume that HRC wins. If she beats Trump, who is anathema to so many voters, by only say, five points, does that mean that a less Trump-y type of anti-establishment candidate would have smoked her? I mean, when you look at Trump it's hard to believe that she's not ahead by 25 (which could happen, maybe).

Further, and more importantly, does that mean that the Democrats now have to find a way to deal with the fact that nearly half the electorate is willing to go for something radically different? I think it legitimately calls into question the assumption of a permanent Democratic majority based on future demographics.

Great questions, and if I had the answers, then I'd already know the future. And I'd be buying lottery tickets instead of commenting here!

I think that we can both overestimate and underestimate what current trends "mean." For example, Trump could actually (to borrow the old phrase) get caught with a dead girl or a live boy, and he still wouldn't get completely blown out by Clinton. The reason why? Because there's so much polarization. There is a large well of people that would vote for the GOP (or anti-Democrat) if the Democrats were running George Washington reincarnated, and the GOP was running Osama Bin Laden's brain-eating zombie corpse. It's just the way it is (and in reverse, as well).

What's more interesting (to me) is that Trump exploited a core demographic in the GOP that had previously fallen into line- a large portion of which is racist, a large portion of which is populist, and a large portion of which doesn't fall into the strong "moral values" category AND is opposed to the libertarian think-tanky ideas that animate the GOP elite. That was his floor - and it was a floor within the GOP that no other candidate had. More importantly (from my perspective) is that the GOP has used a scorch earth strategy for so long in devaluing political norms, in devaluing intellectual opinion, in devaluing media and journalism, in propagating bizarre conspiracy theories (or, at least, not denouncing them), and in devaluing their own party leaders ... that when it came time to try and put some type of authority into the arena ... they couldn't. I mean, seriously, when the party has to turn to Ted "Shut Down Gummint, and Everyone Hates Me" Cruz as a savior, you know things have gone seriously wrong.

Which leads me to three final observations-

1. I never believed in a permanent majority for either party. The two party system is an artifact of first-past the post and our legislative/Presidential system, and as long as we have it, we'll have two parties. As long as there are two parties, one can attain temporary supremacy, and then the other will adapt and change. It always happens.

2. I'm more curious about what happens to the GOP. This is unprecedented. It would be nice to see them react to this by returning to more moderate positions in order to compete. But .... we'll see. Thing is, the 2010 (census) election entrenched them to such as extent in the House and at the state-level, they may view this as an anomaly and just double down.

3. The Democratic primary was unsurprising. The Clinton moderation (from 1992) has run its course. At a certain point, you have to expect some pull to the left. In addition, the Democratic party (thanks to GOP abdication) is now occupying the whole range from middle to extreme left. Assuming Clinton wins, it will be interesting to see what happens in 2020 - will someone run against her?
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on June 18, 2016, 11:23:31 PM
Clinton beat pinko, and he was too stupid to quit even after the math was done, but meh, commies ain't smart (its why they commies)

Trump is a bit alarming, but will win. People want to watch it burn. Reality TV and the internet broke the already weakened minds of the idiot masses.................IT GONNA BURN BITCHES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on June 20, 2016, 08:02:43 AM
Bernie sanders is sticking to his platform and change agenda just like he said he would.

We are delighted that he neither suspended his campaign nor gave a concession speech.

Make no mistake, many of bernies supporters will be voting for him in november because the democratic establishment must be torn down--corporate political parties are getting a recall. 

Feel the Bern!!!!!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on June 20, 2016, 08:09:29 AM
Bernie sanders will continue his campaign because of two reasons.

He wants to fundamentally change corporate government and he can continue to change minds by keeping his message actively driving all the way to the convention.

He believes Hillary will be excoriated by the FBI and thus have new serious legal problems.....effectively Clinton will have to suspend her campaign....then Bernie is the only one standing.

See, its simple.

So exciting!!!!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on June 20, 2016, 01:40:18 PM
...and I would add that it's, well, amusing that someone keeps finding the same topic "popcorn worthy" in this election (remember- he had the popcorn ready for the Benghazi hearing), while ignoring a pretty amazing election that includes, inter alia-

1. A party's prior nominee in open warfare against their current nominee. Seriously, how amazing is the Romney/Trump split (putting Utah ... UTAH!!!! in play).

2. A sitting GOP senator saying that the GOP nominee is too bigoted and racist to be President (??? that's from Kirk, today).

3. The first-ever female presidential nominee from one of the big-two parties.

4. Having both candidates have unfavorable ratings that have never been recorded (seriously- Clinton would have serious difficulties, but for Trump).

5. The continuing and open question as to whether the GOP will revolt prior to, or during, Cleveland.

6. The open question as to whether events (the economy-Brexit, a terror attack, etc.) could substantially upset the race and ... we could actually have a President Trump.

All of the above, and more. Yes, I agree completely.

It is an incredible election, and has exposed so many fractures within the system.

This is probably a somewhat predictable response, but this Trump phenomenon demonstrates how wrong the pundits and party leaders have been at reading the tea leaves. There has been a seething anger building for a long, long time, and I think it's too simplistic to just chalk it up to racism. That certainly is the animating force for some Trump voters, but there's something else going on. There's a strong desire to burn the SOB down, start over.

So here's my question:

Let's assume that HRC wins. If she beats Trump, who is anathema to so many voters, by only say, five points, does that mean that a less Trump-y type of anti-establishment candidate would have smoked her? I mean, when you look at Trump it's hard to believe that she's not ahead by 25 (which could happen, maybe).

Further, and more importantly, does that mean that the Democrats now have to find a way to deal with the fact that nearly half the electorate is willing to go for something radically different? I think it legitimately calls into question the assumption of a permanent Democratic majority based on future demographics.

Some advice for both of you: Look in the mirror--you are both Hillary Clinton fans who cant see that your candidate is a war monger who, like Richard Nixon is a fatally compromised and politically finished......otherwise she should have run away with her nomination....now the only persons endorsement who counts is the one who refuses to give it to her.....more drip drip problems to come.

Secondly, not only Republicans party is being  blown up....but Democrats party is now being berned to the ground.

Bernie is there to pick us up after Hillary has her interrogation and then gets indicted.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on June 20, 2016, 01:42:13 PM
Change has come for Republicans and change is about to come for democrats....like it or not.

Sanders vs. Trump!!!!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on June 20, 2016, 05:56:47 PM
Bernie sanders is sticking to his platform and change agenda just like he said he would.

We are delighted that he neither suspended his campaign nor gave a concession speech.

Make no mistake, many of bernies supporters will be voting for him in november because the democratic establishment must be torn down--corporate political parties are getting a recall. 

Feel the Bern!!!!!
Did vs Do fool........He has NOW..........pinko will be dead of oldcommie disease before the swear in anyways
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on June 20, 2016, 06:46:26 PM
Secondly, not only Republicans party is being  blown up....but Democrats party is now being berned to the ground.

Bernie is there to pick us up after Hillary has her interrogation and then gets indicted.

I'm actually not a big fan of HRC, which is why, unlike, Cinnamon, I can be at least somewhat objective about her candidacy. You're so obsessed with Sanders as a panacea for all that ails the nation, that you've seriously departed from reality.

The fracture in the Democratic party is not even close to the absolute implosion of the Republicans this year.

The Dems have moved to the left as a party over the last couple of decades anyway, and have picked up on the concerns and lingo of Sanders supporters and have incorporated them into the party platform. Stuff like "inequality" will figure big at the convention, and Sanders will play a role. But at the end of the day, HRC is the nominee and Bernie will go home to Vermont.

The vast majority of people who voted for Sanders will vote for HRC. A few diehards (like you) won't, but it won't make much difference. She'll win with or without you.

As far as your wish for an indictment, good luck. Did you see Loretta Lynch on MTP this weekend? She made it clear that DOJ won't lift a finger. Cronyism at it's best. 

Trump will lose, Clinton will win, the Republicans will freak, and Sanders will have a new career as a disheveled late night guest. The new center-left administration will chug predictably along, and you will no doubt update us on every new fake scandal.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on June 21, 2016, 01:45:40 PM
Secondly, not only Republicans party is being  blown up....but Democrats party is now being berned to the ground.

Bernie is there to pick us up after Hillary has her interrogation and then gets indicted.

I'm actually not a big fan of HRC, which is why, unlike, Cinnamon, I can be at least somewhat objective about her candidacy. You're so obsessed with Sanders as a panacea for all that ails the nation, that you've seriously departed from reality.

The fracture in the Democratic party is not even close to the absolute implosion of the Republicans this year.

The Dems have moved to the left as a party over the last couple of decades anyway, and have picked up on the concerns and lingo of Sanders supporters and have incorporated them into the party platform. Stuff like "inequality" will figure big at the convention, and Sanders will play a role. But at the end of the day, HRC is the nominee and Bernie will go home to Vermont.

The vast majority of people who voted for Sanders will vote for HRC. A few diehards (like you) won't, but it won't make much difference. She'll win with or without you.

As far as your wish for an indictment, good luck. Did you see Loretta Lynch on MTP this weekend? She made it clear that DOJ won't lift a finger. Cronyism at it's best. 

Trump will lose, Clinton will win, the Republicans will freak, and Sanders will have a new career as a disheveled late night guest. The new center-left administration will chug predictably along, and you will no doubt update us on every new fake scandal.

Um you dont seem to know what rejection of corporate democratic politics means.  It is a total rejection of the fat cat superpac banking oligarchy that is embodied in the democratic party establishment.

Debbie Wasserman Shultz is the bumbler who orchestrated primary debate structure and exposed the flaws and rigged system.

Maintain-- you got to out the koolaide down. 

Bernie has not conceded and the FBI hasn't concluded

Until then----you are whistling past the graveyard drunk on koolaide.

Lmfao--so if you aren't a Hillary fan then who did you vote for?

I'm NOT wrong on this---maintain you ether voted for Hillary Clinton in the primary or you didn't vote for anyone at all. Lolololol!!!!!

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on June 21, 2016, 03:51:50 PM
Yeah, I held my nose and voted for HRC. I'm not a big fan, but she has a better grasp of the issues and isn't a "gimmick" candidate like Sanders.

Sanders is a good guy, but would have accomplished very little. Congress is not going to vote for new taxes, which he needs to fund his cradle-to-grave welfare state. Tax the rich? Not enough. Tax corporations? Still not enough. Cut spending? Nope, sooner or later middle class taxes would have to be raised and that would be the end of Sanders. As my colleague says, "Americans love free stuff until they find out how much it costs." 

Estimates are that his programs would have added 15-18 trillion to the debt. No thanks.

Sanders is a big picture guy, but I'm not convinced that he would have been able to handle the day to day managerial tasks which are the less sexy side of the Presidency.

Finally, let's assume that you're right and HRC gets indicted. That's still no guarantee that Sanders gets the nomination. Delegates could just as easily go for whoever else throws their hat in the ring.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on June 23, 2016, 07:59:54 AM
Yeah, I held my nose and voted for HRC. I'm not a big fan, but she has a better grasp of the issues and isn't a "gimmick" candidate like Sanders.

Sanders is a good guy, but would have accomplished very little. Congress is not going to vote for new taxes, which he needs to fund his cradle-to-grave welfare state. Tax the rich? Not enough. Tax corporations? Still not enough. Cut spending? Nope, sooner or later middle class taxes would have to be raised and that would be the end of Sanders. As my colleague says, "Americans love free stuff until they find out how much it costs." 

Estimates are that his programs would have added 15-18 trillion to the debt. No thanks.

Sanders is a big picture guy, but I'm not convinced that he would have been able to handle the day to day managerial tasks which are the less sexy side of the Presidency.

Finally, let's assume that you're right and HRC gets indicted. That's still no guarantee that Sanders gets the nomination. Delegates could just as easily go for whoever else throws their hat in the ring.

Meh? So you compromised your principles and sold out to a candidate you know is under an FBI criminal investigation....sorry you had to hold your nose.

This is exactly why you Hillary dumptys will bring us Donald trump---thanks a lot.

Funny, barak Obama offered some great change-- pie in the sky offerings and he wasn't a gimmick candidate? Unless you think he was.


And it shows your ignorance that you dont think sanders could handle the day to day operations of the potus--- his whole campaign was textbook guide to making money and organizing massive events????
You are either simply foolish or haven't been paying attention.


I am a full fledged supporter of sanders and more than half of us will never ever ever vote for corrupt Clinton....

But mark my words: The party will be irrevocably changed..

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on June 23, 2016, 09:22:37 AM
Bryan pagliano, Hillary Clinton IT guy took the 5th 125 times in a lawsuit deposition??????????????

Awesome!  I can't wait to hear what he confessed to the FBI....

Folks, we have found a smoking

😊


Now some blue corn for the drive to the democratic convention.


Pop pop pop!!!!

H.A.----almost there.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on June 23, 2016, 01:42:32 PM
Hey loki,

Did sanders concede the nomination yet? Did he say he's not going to be bringing his campaign to the convention?

Did Hillary Clinton IT guy pagliano just take the fifth 125 under deposition......???????

So, lol you have contended that the FBI are not conducting a criminal investigation into Hillary clinton--- I bet you do now😉
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on June 23, 2016, 01:46:50 PM
Come on guys--- with all the shite on Clinton and her failures and war vote on Iraq and her failure with Libya--- she is a failed warmonger and Trump is already destroying her and her reputation---her feminist credentials are blown up because she demonized the rape and sex victims of her husband---- we can go on and on and on---

She done.

Bernie can beat Trump and Trump can't touch him!!!!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on June 23, 2016, 01:51:14 PM
Hillary is propped up by Obama for show--until the FBI dust settles--
Obama knows Hillary is toast.

Pardon?

Sanders will not be getting out.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on June 23, 2016, 04:48:01 PM
Did sanders concede the nomination yet?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/06/22/sanders-it-doesnt-appear-that-im-going-to-be-the-nominee/

Yes, he did.

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on June 23, 2016, 08:16:17 PM
Yeah, that didn't sound like he gave her a rousing endorsement.
Did it to you?

He did express where he seriously disagrees with her, though. I got that loud and clear.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on June 24, 2016, 01:24:15 AM
Yeah, that didn't sound like he gave her a rousing endorsement.
Did it to you?

He did express where he seriously disagrees with her, though. I got that loud and clear.

Trump is the president
get over it or expect to be getting "a visit" in the middle of a "night of long-something or other"
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on June 24, 2016, 09:11:21 AM
...long knives?

Dude? Yagottahrealizeidontgiveashit eabouttrumpandcouldcarelessab outtokenissues.

According to your dumbass--trump has to be a token????

Lil....what token is he? The resident dumbass like yourself?

Some Bernie supporters are voting for him anyway....

In either case...the repub party is blown up...and democratic party is torn in to 3 pieces...establishment..democ ratic socialist...green party.

Suck it because Bernie is NOT suspending his campaign...

You dumbass...lolololol
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on June 24, 2016, 10:52:05 AM
Here you go, Cinnamon.

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/bernie-sanders-says-he-will-vote-hillary-clinton-n598251

Sanders says he will vote for Clinton. Think about that for a minute. The guy you will write-in will not vote for himself, because he has the intellectual maturity to understand that defeating Trump is more important. What does that say about you?

I think it says that either you picked the wrong guy in the first place because he's a sellout (unlikely), or that your diehard position is sort of childish (likely). 
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on June 24, 2016, 09:03:42 PM
Here you go, Cinnamon.

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/bernie-sanders-says-he-will-vote-hillary-clinton-n598251

Sanders says he will vote for Clinton. Think about that for a minute. The guy you will write-in will not vote for himself, because he has the intellectual maturity to understand that defeating Trump is more important. What does that say about you?

I think it says that either you picked the wrong guy in the first place because he's a sellout (unlikely), or that your diehard position is sort of childish (likely).

I just think you are trying too hard, maintain....

Let me explain this one more time for you.

Has sanders said he is going to "suspend" his campaign?

And it is irrelevant because many of us WILL be voting for him in November as a write in candidate-- that has been baked in the cake for a long time.

 FBI have an investigation going on which will change the election drastically--

Not a hint of campaign suspension and an open investigation.  Keep trying though.😉
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on June 24, 2016, 09:15:37 PM
He's voting for his opponent. Who cares whether he's suspended his already dead campaign. This is a great example of why the left never really gets anywhere.

There is no revolution. Never was. Just total capitulation.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on June 24, 2016, 09:18:41 PM
Maintain,
You seem to be a nice person but you admit you had to compromise your principles.  Politics can be very complex and you have to realize that a great deal if the electorate dont care about the Dem Rep parties.
Many folks like me dont give a shite about party unity--that is for dupes.

We are independent and what you call spoiler we call a vote of principle, understand now?

So, whether it is Jill or Bernie we dont care.  Clinton is a non starter and Trump is a non starter.

Your support of Clinton will bring us Donald trump because she's been compromised for a long time. 

Bernie is not under criminal investigation.
Truth hurts dont it.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on June 24, 2016, 09:20:44 PM
He's voting for his opponent. Who cares whether he's suspended his already dead campaign. This is a great example of why the left never really gets anywhere.

There is no revolution. Never was. Just total capitulation.


Lol, maintain you are a "nose holding" rookie.

You should go read a little about Nixon and the FBI....

Wake up!!!!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on June 30, 2016, 09:33:53 AM
....pop pop pop

A special thank you from us Bernie fans to the man himself!!!

Thank you for staying in the democratic race at least until the convention...it makes liary Clinton squirm everyday and eats away at her voter support-----some of her supporters are done with her now.

The meeting between bill Clinton and loretta lynch was a blessing because she must recuse herself-- if not formally she will have to side step this.


Hillary can only stall her FBI interrogation a little bit-)-- the chickens are coming home to roost.

Clinton does NOT want to talk to the FBI. Much as she falsely claims she is eadger to move on.....

Didn't happen for Nixon; wont happen for Clinton. Lmfao!!!!

Drip drip drip
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on July 01, 2016, 01:21:34 AM
Anyone stupid enough to write in a person who isn't a recognized write in candidate (who then by the rules of elections does not get counted) is someone who shouldn't be voting anyways.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on July 01, 2016, 09:03:18 AM
Anyone stupid enough to write in a person who isn't a recognized write in candidate (who then by the rules of elections does not get counted) is someone who shouldn't be voting anyways.

Hey tokenpuddy,
The only legally clean candidate has been blacklisted by the corrupt democratic party trying to fix an election.

When Clinton is perp walked into the FBI interrogation there will be one man still standing and that is Bernie sanders---get it?

It's not a write in dumbass its simply called a free election vote--- we get to do that occasionally in the USA.

Get it now?

Clean the shite out of your diapers-- you stink---put some big boy pants on while you are at it

You dumbass!!!!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on July 01, 2016, 10:09:00 PM
write in votes, that are not from a pre approved list of write ins, don't count (even if a majority)
they count only as "present" votes..........I know they don't teach this at law school, but google it.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on July 02, 2016, 02:44:56 PM
write in votes, that are not from a pre approved list of write ins, don't count (even if a majority)
they count only as "present" votes..........I know they don't teach this at law school, but google it.

Sanders hasn't suspended his campaign dumbass--no write in vote necessary yet---you dumbass...

Google it tokenboy!!!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on July 02, 2016, 02:48:37 PM
FBI just interrogated Liary Clinton---dum da dum dum!!!!!!

Oh to be a fly on the wall of that interrogation---- all the lying must be amazing!!!

Lmfao!!!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on July 03, 2016, 12:20:02 AM
Let me get this straight......

Hillary Clinton on the Saturday of 4thjuly weekend had 3 hour interrogation at FBI headquarters.

Awesome.

I'm laughing so hard because she says she was pleased to help the FBI with their musical review? Pleased?

Pleeeaaase.

She had been looking forward to it and had been beefing up all week on "her story" that she would tell to them about how she didn't know people could hack into her email....she knowingly knows nothing about how any of it works....

This dum dum should never be allowed in office again!

And she was
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on July 03, 2016, 09:21:28 AM
write in votes, that are not from a pre approved list of write ins, don't count (even if a majority)
they count only as "present" votes..........I know they don't teach this at law school, but google it.

Sanders hasn't suspended his campaign dumbass--no write in vote necessary yet---you dumbass...

Google it tokenboy!!!
Hey Assburgers............read your own posts............
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on July 05, 2016, 09:39:34 AM
No charges for Clinton, Cinnamon.

Looks like another prediction fell through. How many does that make?

Let's see, what will be your next talking point? Oh, I know! That even though Sanders lost and is voting for Clinton, and even though Benghazi and the email scandal amounted to nothing, she will still be brought down by a renewed interest in Travlegate!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on July 05, 2016, 09:55:27 AM
Wow, such fun watching the political fallout from Hillary Clinton's irresponsible and dangerous mishandling of top secret classified information.

This will continually eat away at her support as information drips from the FBI...

Bernie sanders is the only candidate who has the temperment and trust to be our commander in chief.

I'm sorry for establishment nose holding trump er Clinton supporters but many of us will be writing in bernies name--some will sit home--some will vote for Jill.

Like it or not Clinton has been hacked by foreign governments and the FBI says she's incompetent and therefore unelectable...

No amount of campaigning will bring her enthusiasm and she will be losing Ohio and Florida to another horse of a different color..

Best part of all this is while Nixon managed to get into office--Hillary got busted before she can get to the convention.

Thanks FBI!!!

Just opened some Orville Redenbacher.....looking forward to hearing what else the FBI found out.

Such fun!!!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on July 05, 2016, 10:04:01 AM
No charges for Clinton, Cinnamon.

Looks like another prediction fell through. How many does that make?


All of them? I mean, c'mon. If you didn't know he was a delusional troll by the time of the last Benghazi hearing, what will it take?

But, sure, we can continue to laugh at him. At this point, I am reasonably confident that he is a Hillary supporter that is just doing a pitch-perfect parody of her crazy enemies. Because, really, no one is that stupid.

Right?
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on July 05, 2016, 10:34:05 AM
No charges for Clinton, Cinnamon.

Looks like another prediction fell through. How many does that make?


All of them? I mean, c'mon. If you didn't know he was a delusional troll by the time of the last Benghazi hearing, what will it take?

But, sure, we can continue to laugh at him. At this point, I am reasonably confident that he is a Hillary supporter that is just doing a pitch-perfect parody of her crazy enemies. Because, really, no one is that stupid.

Right?

Lol, you are a discredited fool.
Did you even listen to what the FBI found?

You fool, you have been in denial about the FBI criminal investigation for a while-- but your posting here confirms that while on the surface you try to make jokes---I am laughing at you because you "outed' yourself--

Deep down you know Clinton fuched up and is unellectable.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on July 05, 2016, 10:35:54 AM
Hillary Clinton can never be trusted to hold political office again
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on July 05, 2016, 10:39:43 AM
Hillary Clinton can never be trusted to hold political office again

Given your past history, it would now appear that Hillary Clinton is a lock for the White House!

I will say this- while a stopped clock is right at least twice a day, you have the unenviable tenacity to both be always wrong, and continue posting. As they say, if you don't know why other people are laughing, then you're the joke. :)
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on July 05, 2016, 11:31:10 AM
You are a real fool.  I think you Hillary fools have brought us President Trump.

And for the record I wasn't wrong or Clinton would have been a lock already.

Thats the proof
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on July 05, 2016, 11:40:09 AM

And for the record I wasn't wrong or Clinton would have been a lock already.


Uh huh. Sure, when your candidate disbands his campaign, announces he's voting for the other candidate, and all of the people that have endorsed him (well, I should say the few ...) have come out strong for Hillary ... and when Hillary has been busy building a general campaign apparatus and campaigning for the general election- who do you believe, the Always Wrong Troll or your lying eyes?

What, are you going to be posting after the convention saying, "It's just a flesh wound. Just wait for my popcorn! Sanders will win on write-in ballots! Derp!" Wait ... that's exactly what you're going to be writing.

Keep up the comedy stylings, friend! Like I wrote, you're a pitch perfect parody of the idiot commenter. Gold star!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on July 05, 2016, 11:59:21 AM

And for the record I wasn't wrong or Clinton would have been a lock already.


Uh huh. Sure, when your candidate disbands his campaign, announces he's voting for the other candidate, and all of the people that have endorsed him (well, I should say the few ...) have come out strong for Hillary ... and when Hillary has been busy building a general campaign apparatus and campaigning for the general election- who do you believe, the Always Wrong Troll or your lying eyes?

What, are you going to be posting after the convention saying, "It's just a flesh wound. Just wait for my popcorn! Sanders will win on write-in ballots! Derp!" Wait ... that's exactly what you're going to be writing.

Keep up the comedy stylings, friend! Like I wrote, you're a pitch perfect parody of the idiot commenter. Gold star!

I'm going to be kind.  Hillary Clinton is politically unsalvageable.

Her run for higher office is over.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on July 05, 2016, 12:05:56 PM

Her run for higher office is over.

Based on the immutable Law of Cinnamon Troll*, that means her run for higher office is just beginning!

Seriously- can you give us your NFL picks? There's some money to be made here.


*The Law of Cinnamon Troll, loosely stated, is that if Cinnamon Troll says it, it is either wrong now, or will be wrong shortly.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on July 05, 2016, 05:47:02 PM
The FBI has confirmed "crooked hillarys" incompetence and lies.

It's going to be weird checking out twitter to see how the clown car regime deals with Putin.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on July 06, 2016, 12:05:39 AM
To all those other than the noseholding Clinton dupes who have been following this thread.....

Awesome!!!!!

James Comey s words regarding the FBI criminal investigation based on cold hard facts have put the final nail in her political career.  A devastating character deconstruction exposing many of her lies and dangerous stupidity--

All because she is a paranoid twit at heart.

Comey didn't need an indictment after all--its the cover up not the crime which destroys careers---Nixon for one, and now hiliary....



It has been such fun to watch. 
Now I will write in sanders name in November...hopefully trump will only get one term.

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on July 06, 2016, 07:40:30 AM

Now I will write in sanders name in November...hopefully trump will only get one term.

Cinnamon Troll's stages of popcorn-

1. Denial. But Sanders is still going to win! I don't understand math, so ... delegates? California?
2. Anger. But Clinton is really Nixon!
3. Bargaining. Despite reality, something something Sanders will still win the nomination.
4. Depression. Where is my popcorn now?
5. Acceptance. Boy, I hope that Trump wins!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on July 06, 2016, 09:18:34 AM
Lol, James comey and the FBI have completely destroyed hillarys credibility.

You better read what he said-- I've been telling you what they would find for a while now and i am vindicated.....i dont give a shite that Obama is not going to prosecute.

I accepted that trump would be president a long time ago.

I still will write in bernies name for president.....its about principle.




Clinton is finished.

Truth and facts hurt dont they?

This has been such fun. ;)


Keep posting though lol....you are a fun punching bag.lololol
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on July 06, 2016, 10:02:37 AM
Lol, James comey and the FBI have completely destroyed hillarys credibility.

You better read what he said-- I've been telling you what they would find for a while now and i am vindicated.....i dont give a shite that Obama is not going to prosecute.

I accepted that trump would be president a long time ago.

I still will write in bernies name for president.....its about principle.




Clinton is finished.

Truth and facts hurt dont they?

This has been such fun. ;)


Keep posting though lol....you are a fun punching bag.lololol

Qui, moi? I don't need to bother refuting your points- they refute themselves! Seriously, you've been banging this drum that blah blah Sanders will win the nomination blah blah Clinton will be indicted blah blah Trump won't win. And, as everyone else already said- it doesn't matter what happens, you'll just move on to the next point. I'm quite sure that next year, after we have President Clinton, you'll be saying, "Ha, that's what I always said, but I've got my popcorn ready because of (whatever, we're laughing at you)."

Seriously, u mad bro? Clowned again? Just to think; by gracing us with your presence, you have deprived some poor village of their idiot.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on July 06, 2016, 10:44:17 AM
Loki, by now we know that Cinnamon never lets facts get in the way of a good story.

Clinton is destroyed, just like Nixon: Except that every single major poll shows her ahead of Trump by 5-10. When she wins in November Cinnamon and her types will start talking about the inevitable impeachment because she failed to screen her phone calls or something.

As I've said before, I'm not a Clinton fan. In fact, the legitimate criticism from Comey was well deserved and illustrates why I'm not a Clinton fan. All politicians lie, but she does it clumsily.

What I don't get about the Cinnamons of the world, though, is the rabid nature of their anti-Clinton sentiments. When you get to the point where you think she's actually worse than Trump, or that the outcomes under either administration would be interchangeable, then you've left the world of reality and have camped in the world of personality-driven emotional outbursts.

I'm not happy about my choices in November, but if it is actually a close election I'm amazed, AMAZED, that a Sanders supporter would throw away a vote that could be used against Trump. Sanders himself has said that defeating Trump is the #1 priority. 
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on July 06, 2016, 11:54:47 AM

As I've said before, I'm not a Clinton fan. In fact, the legitimate criticism from Comey was well deserved and illustrates why I'm not a Clinton fan. All politicians lie, but she does it clumsily.


You know, it's a weird thing. I'm not even so much of a Democrat by desire, as much of a not-Republican by circumstances. A Rockefeller Republican that, by default, has become a Democrat (although still registered as an Independent).

And when it comes to Clinton, I'm really meh. I could not be less enthused - although she was a better choice than Sanders, but only because Sander was only ever a protest candidate. The scary thing, though, is that there isn't a large number of prominent national Democrats to choose from. Seriously- I still couldn't pick out O'Malley in a lineup.

Warren? Booker? ummm....... See what I mean? The scary thing isn't that Clinton is the nominee, or that she is so uninspiring, it's that I have a hard time picking a better person for this cycle. *sigh*
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on July 06, 2016, 01:14:55 PM
To quote HRC's airplane-visiting hubby, "I feel your pain."

I was a registered Democrat for 20 years. At the time (mid 90s) I felt that my political views were more in line with the Democrats. Not totally in line, but more so than the Republicans.

Over the last 20 years the Republicans moved ever further towards over-delivering for the Chamber of Commerce/National Review types while simultaneously pandering to Evangelicals, NRA members, etc. It was a weird mixture of bedfellows that I never felt comfortable with.

The Democrats, OTOH, moved in some ways politically right (neoliberalism, interventionist foreign policy) while doing their own pandering to obnoxious politically correct "activists" (ie; rich kids from Dartmouth who like to lecture you about income inequality) and playing identity politics to the hilt.

I never liked this combination either.

So, I changed my registration to No Preference and grumpily concede that I am no longer represented by either party. I guess I'm a Kennedy Democrat, or maybe a Kemp Republican. Sad times.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on July 06, 2016, 01:23:38 PM

So, I changed my registration to No Preference and grumpily concede that I am no longer represented by either party. I guess I'm a Kennedy Democrat, or maybe a Kemp Republican. Sad times.

Well, function follows form, in this case. With our system of governance (first past the post, federalism, Republic, Presidential), we are doomed to have a two-party system. If you look at history, you can see that there are brief period where there is a partly-viable third party that either gets destroyed, subsumed in another party, or becomes one of the two parties (the current GOP). That's it- there's no way in our system to have more than two for any sustained length of time.

Given that, we all must map our interests on to the party that is least offensive to us, I guess.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on July 06, 2016, 03:05:20 PM
Bernie was booed by house establishment democrats pissed off that he wont suspend his campaign....

Precious.🎇


...it will be an honor to cast my vote for him in the fall😊

That's called a full throated conscious clear, principled vote which separates us from those democrats who will be secretly or openly voting for trump---- trumpheads.





Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on July 06, 2016, 03:22:10 PM
Bernie was booed by house establishment democrats pissed off that he wont suspend his campaign....

Precious.🎇


...it will be an honor to cast my vote for him in the fall😊

That's called a full throated conscious clear, principled vote which separates us from those democrats who will be secretly or openly voting for trump---- trumpheads.

Oh, you think you're principled. Bless your heart!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on July 06, 2016, 04:50:04 PM
Comey is going to be asked to explain more on Thursday.

Lmao! What else needs to be said?

Hilary is done.

Fun to watch....absolutely awesome!!!!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on July 06, 2016, 07:18:25 PM
Comey is going to be asked to explain more on Thursday.

Lmao! What else needs to be said?

Hilary is done.

Fun to watch....absolutely awesome!!!!
go on.........explain the logic fuckery required for this...............
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on July 07, 2016, 07:49:37 AM
The FBI with its condemning evidence of Clinton's pathetic lies, stupidity and total incompetence in a short shrift destroyed any chances of Hillary becoming president.

She, now reminds me of another pathetic disaster-- George bush junior.

Problem is although he was an incompetent idiot...some morons somehow liked his personality--relatable.

Sanders would have given trump a run for his money.

Hillary is a paper tiger--now, more like a paper toeel--and she, like Nixon has destroyed her own chances of becoming more than a good first lady.

Trump is like male private part Cheney.

Clinton screwed us big time.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on July 07, 2016, 08:07:29 AM
I got to admit  c spans coverage of James comey, inspectors general, and other state dept officials brings 1970's nostalgia....

Like watching part of the Watergate hearings.

More torpedo's headed for Clinton as her negligence exposed---combed through details and devil in details regarding her transgressions.

I put the popcorn away but this will be awesome to watch. 
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on July 07, 2016, 08:33:56 AM
Watch Trump pick Susanna Martinez to be vice president.

Politics makes for odd bedfellows.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on July 07, 2016, 09:38:33 AM
The FBI with its condemning evidence of Clinton's pathetic lies, stupidity and total incompetence in a short shrift destroyed any chances of Hillary becoming president.

If she were running against anyone other than Trump I might agree with you. Incredibly, however, the GOP delivered her an early Christmas present decorated in swastika wrapping paper. Trump is the only person in America who is less liked than Clinton, and the election will essentially be a referendum on Trumpism.

Again, look at the objective statistical data. She has perhaps as many as 255 electoral votes. Trump has actually made Utah and Arizona competitive, which is amazing. His "campaign" is a twitter feed. He is close in a couple of swing states (OH and PA), but he would have to run the table and get all the swing states in order to have a shot.

If the Republicans had run Kasich, Rubio, or anyone else even halfway sane, she'd be toast. But they didn't, so she's not.

If there were any kooky conspiracy theory that I was willing to entertain, it would be that Clinton urged Trump to run and to be as crazy as possible. The whole thing is too bizarre.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on July 07, 2016, 09:41:14 AM

Again, look at the objective statistical data.

You forgot who you were talking to, right? Conversations involve people that occupy a shared reality. ;)
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on July 07, 2016, 11:10:38 PM
The FBI with its condemning evidence of Clinton's pathetic lies, stupidity and total incompetence in a short shrift destroyed any chances of Hillary becoming president.

If she were running against anyone other than Trump I might agree with you. Incredibly, however, the GOP delivered her an early Christmas present decorated in swastika wrapping paper. Trump is the only person in America who is less liked than Clinton, and the election will essentially be a referendum on Trumpism.

Again, look at the objective statistical data. She has perhaps as many as 255 electoral votes. Trump has actually made Utah and Arizona competitive, which is amazing. His "campaign" is a twitter feed. He is close in a couple of swing states (OH and PA), but he would have to run the table and get all the swing states in order to have a shot.

If the Republicans had run Kasich, Rubio, or anyone else even halfway sane, she'd be toast. But they didn't, so she's not.

If there were any kooky conspiracy theory that I was willing to entertain, it would be that Clinton urged Trump to run and to be as crazy as possible. The whole thing is too bizarre.
couldn't read past the cliché national socialist comment, Bernie was the only person with socialist in his agenda
cant read past retard
sorry-cant be done
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on July 07, 2016, 11:11:54 PM

Again, look at the objective statistical data.

You forgot who you were talking to, right? Conversations involve people that occupy a shared reality. ;)
there is only one reality
and anyone with a steady party designation on their voting record has no attachment to it
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on July 09, 2016, 11:34:16 AM
couldn't read past the cliché national socialist comment, Bernie was the only person with socialist in his agenda

I'm not implying that he's a socialist, I'm implying that he's a racist.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on July 10, 2016, 12:30:45 AM
couldn't read past the cliché national socialist comment, Bernie was the only person with socialist in his agenda

I'm not implying that he's a socialist, I'm implying that he's a racist.
please don't be one of those idiots who says a thing straight up and then says "imply"........its painful
and yeah Nazi=national socialist (you knew that, don't fake retard-I call faking)

Hitler sure hated those Mexicans..........that was pure hitler............
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on July 10, 2016, 12:31:33 AM
Reality Break.......Hitler was an immigrant. Get over it.

Born in one nation, ruled in another.

holy @#!* the retard train.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on July 10, 2016, 10:40:16 AM
You're not too bright. The line for the short bus is over there.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on July 10, 2016, 01:22:15 PM
You're not too bright. The line for the short bus is over there.
you......stole my joke...... >:(

-but the facts remain, hitler WAS an immigrant, so pretending that someone who is anti illegal immigration is hitler is foolish at best. (at best)
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on July 12, 2016, 09:47:12 AM
Cinnamon, I have a serious question. This isn't intended as criticism, I'm just genuinely curious.

Since Sanders has officially endorsed Clinton today, and since you are so strongly opposed to Clinton, do you think that:

1) Sanders is a sellout?

and

2) Will you still vote for Sanders given that he has endorsed someone so antithetical to your beliefs?

I'm curious because I wonder how many Sanders supporters must be seriously disappointed by sanders himself.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on July 12, 2016, 10:03:42 AM
Maintain-

Do you really want to ask Spiced Troll? As in, do you think his answers are representative of the overall Sanders vote?

In the more, ahem, tied-to-reality, living on things other than popcorn community, I would look to the following-

1. Past is prologue. Whenever there is an interesting fight within a party, you end up seeing those who declare, "I will never vote for the other person." (Remember the PUMAs - party unity my ... behind, who supported Clinton and not Obama?). But the majority eventually comes back to the fold. Heck, even *Trump* is getting a fair amount of GOP support, and he's ... well, not a typical GOP candidate. After all is said and done, support for the party (or dislike of the other party) counts for more than the intra-party differences.

2. The nature of Sanders' support. Yes, he did attract a lot of "super liberal" folks, and those people will be appeased by the changes made to the Democratic platform. But a fair amount of support in the primaries came from those who disliked Obama (yeah, I know) - see, for example, his victory in West Virginia. He attracted not just supporters, but those who were simply protesting - and Sanders would not have received their votes in the general, anyway (unless you think a New England socialist is going to win West Virginia is the general). This isn't to discount the fact that he identified a key Democratic constituency and motivated them, but it also speaks to the fact that this constituency is over-represented in the actual support he received.

Anyway, Sanders will campaign with and for Clinton and appear at the convention. You'll see the usual rates of people returning to the fold; cf. the rates for the Clinton/Obama race.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on July 12, 2016, 06:51:40 PM
Cinnamon, I have a serious question. This isn't intended as criticism, I'm just genuinely curious.

Since Sanders has officially endorsed Clinton today, and since you are so strongly opposed to Clinton, do you think that:

1) Sanders is a sellout?

and

2) Will you still vote for Sanders given that he has endorsed someone so antithetical to your beliefs?

I'm curious because I wonder how many Sanders supporters must be seriously disappointed by sanders himself.
Don't listen to Loki...........feed the troll...............FEED IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on July 13, 2016, 10:42:56 AM
Loki:

I agree that the vast majority of Sanders supporters will vote for Clinton, if grudgingly.

My question is about they view Sanders himself after his endorsement of Clinton. This is anecdotal, but so many of the Sanders supporters I know were as opposed to Clinton as they were to Trump. I think Cinnamon falls into that category.

So, when the guy who they supported so strongly endorses someone who they oppose so strongly, does that change their opinion of Sanders? Do they think he's a sellout, or do they say "Hey, it's politics and the most important thing is defeating Trump!" (Which is essentially Sanders' line).

I'm curious because it seems like there would have to be some cognitive dissonance involved in order for it to NOT change their opinion of Sanders, at least somewhat.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on July 13, 2016, 11:33:07 AM
Loki:

I agree that the vast majority of Sanders supporters will vote for Clinton, if grudgingly.

My question is about they view Sanders himself after his endorsement of Clinton. This is anecdotal, but so many of the Sanders supporters I know were as opposed to Clinton as they were to Trump. I think Cinnamon falls into that category.

So, when the guy who they supported so strongly endorses someone who they oppose so strongly, does that change their opinion of Sanders? Do they think he's a sellout, or do they say "Hey, it's politics and the most important thing is defeating Trump!" (Which is essentially Sanders' line).

I'm curious because it seems like there would have to be some cognitive dissonance involved in order for it to NOT change their opinion of Sanders, at least somewhat.

Well, I don't think you can easily categorize all Sanders voters, as I alluded to in my earlier post. How they feel about Sanders himself will likely depend on what type of Sanders voters they were to begin with.

There is the old-school, mostly white, left wing of the Democratic party. They either already get it, or will get it.
There are the young people for whom this is their first election. "Politics" and "compromise" is a dirty word, and the idea of losing the battle, but then fighting the war, is a new one. Again, though, I'm not overly worried about them.
Then there are those who were motivated primarily for hatred of Clinton and/or Obama (call them the Spiced Troll / West Virginia voters). To be honest, I don't think they'll come around, and I don't think it was really about Sanders at any point.

It's the second category that's the most interesting to me, and that's the area that Sanders himself will have to work on.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on July 13, 2016, 02:09:08 PM
did............did cyn straight up KILL himself!??!?!? (or am I hoping too large?)
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on July 17, 2016, 10:06:06 AM
What an amazing time.  FBI investigation ended with an indictment without the formal indictment which has confirmed our distrust of Hilliary Clinton.  The first part of the FBI investigation is over but more to come is expected.

Suffice it to say though we were correct about her lies and gross negligence with regard to classified info---which is the second to Las nail in her political coffin.....because us sanders supporters are now dissapoonted that Bernie will not have a shot at the presidency----

Btw....thanks Clinton supporters---you f-ing one party only voters---we have a much greater direction to which we will now follow---
But you simpletons have brought us president Donald trump---a one term president---thanks for giving us the other jackass in the race...

We sanders supporters voice will continue to be a force to be reckoned with as our agent bows to the corporate democratic party---he will continue his fight and could have been a great 3 rf party candidate--- which he WILL be with our now actual protest vote!!!!

there are 3 other options for us...which I will explain later..

But thanks you one party Hillary supporters---thanks for nothing---
We blame you for the rise of trump.......
Assholes!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on July 18, 2016, 08:23:07 AM
But thanks you one party Hillary supporters---thanks for nothing---
We blame you for the rise of trump.......
Assholes!

U mad bro?

I have to admire your chutzpah*, but blaming Democrats for the rise of Trump is particularly rich. I hate to break the news to you,** but Clinton came in a (very) close second to Obama in 2008 after she was the presumptive nominee, and was the presumptive nominee coming in to this cycle, so her victory, while disappointing to some, was pretty much par for the course.

Despite this, you have been intensely focused on a rather boring election that everyone knew was finished a long time ago (hint- proportional delegates), instead of the bizarre and fascinating rise of Trump(tm), and what it means to the GOP. I would be more worried ... but since you are now predicting a Trump victory, that means that the nation can sleep soundly at night.


*Defined as the ability of a person to kill their parents, and the plead for leniency because they are an orphan. Or, in the alternative, the ability of a person to continue to make 100% wrong popcorn predictions, and then keep spouting off like anyone is doing anything but laugh at him.

**No, I don't. I love it, although with the caveat that you couldn't learn something if it was attached to a semi and it ran you over.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on July 18, 2016, 10:14:03 AM
Loki, the well goes a bit deeper than even what cyn wrote as far as Dems creating Trump (and they very much so DID)

Politics are like a pendulum the more you push one way, the more its unavoidable to push back the opposite way until everyone leaves it alone long enough to organically get to where it should be (which in politics is NEVER fyi)

Obama asked for too much too soon. And he continues to do so on his way out.

Same pendulum swinging is why BLM supporters keep shooting cops too. Its all just weight and gravity.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on July 18, 2016, 11:46:47 AM
Loki, the well goes a bit deeper than even what cyn wrote as far as Dems creating Trump (and they very much so DID)

Politics are like a pendulum the more you push one way, the more its unavoidable to push back the opposite way until everyone leaves it alone long enough to organically get to where it should be (which in politics is NEVER fyi)

Obama asked for too much too soon. And he continues to do so on his way out.

Same pendulum swinging is why BLM supporters keep shooting cops too. Its all just weight and gravity.

That is ... one of the best parodies of #THANKSOBAMA I have ever seen.

That said, Trump (or a Trump-like substance) was a necessary result of the GOP's policies and practices. Simply put, they have engaged in anti-elite, anti-establishment rhetoric, so it should come as no surprise that the elite and the establishment were not able to seize control. They have continuously stoked the fires against politicians, so, again, is it any surprise that a non-politician has seized the levers of power? They tried to harness the fury of nativists and racists, without fully comprehending that these same people might not be as attached to free trade as the GOP is.* They fed off of the anger and resentment of talk radio and Fox News, which allowed short-term electoral success at the expense of long-term electoral stability. And so on.

More importantly, politics is hard. It is the art of the possible, filled with compromise and gradual change. It is not the continual unmet promises of revolution unfilled, with brinkmanship as its lodestone ("We'll repeal Obamacare, and shutdown the government, again, to do so.").  Trump only exploited that which was already there.

The Democrats have 99 problems, but the Trump ain't one.

*This is not, by the way, to say that the GOP is/was nativist and/or racist. But it was perfectly happy to pander to those interests to get their votes.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on July 18, 2016, 07:19:13 PM
Here is the thing.  Bernie sanders is not a sellout--he is and always was a representative of "occupy wall street"....so, no matter the agent it is the policies we are interested in "establishing"...the democrats, you know, jackasses who always vote straight party line are the corporate establishment--tho is what we wanted to tear down--and it is coming---this is going to be activated on the local and state level-- that is the focus....
Bernie didn't Suspend his campaign because, frankly it is bigger than him. He said he wont run as a third party and he didn't lie. He kept his word---that smarts because we have now an absentee landlord....but fully understood....we were waiting not for an indictment without the indictment---because its obvious she was negligent and shady based upon the evidence the FBI dug up on her--- she lied and got busted--------her legal problems will continue and that will be fun to continue watching...but I am disengaged in the race now....her problems are not going to end.

She is a lying sack of shite and a crook.

Some inner insight sheds light on our sanders dynamic....

Some of us will vote for Hillary begrudgingly....but not as many as the media will have you think.

But the red of us will go a different direction.
Some, in fact many will vote for trump because Clinton is a warmonger and trump strongly opposed the war in Iraq and didn't think we should have been trying for regime change in lybya---

Get it??? She's a Hawk with a capital H--- no good.
This is a major point that the media will bury.


So, Trump carries Democrat values.
Then there are the dixicrats or Appalachia democrats who are bigots-- not racists--since that is a social construct----straight up bigots.

Trump is a democrat---was a Democrat-- and only switched his party line in recent years.

Hillary as a corporate/wall street shill/warmonger to many of us is worse than trump.....so, suck on that one.

Now, those closer to my heart are going to be voting for Jill Stein because the green party is really in line with bernies message and political agenda....and we will affect state elections....jill stein will be the defacto go to third party ticket..

That was bakes into the cake since before Bernie even announced his candidacy.

Some will be writing in bernies name as protest vote.....in fact the media will bury that story as well.

Eg..lololol....not found in any periodical...lollol...in a group of 39 independents whom I know one third will be writing in bernies name....

Some of us have lost all enthusiasm and will be staying home on election day...they say that if Hillary lovers want her fat ass in the oval office they are going to have to lift her up--dirty underpants and all ON THEIR OWN....good luck with that stench...

So, as you see many Bernie fans dislike Clinton MUCH MUCH more than Trump....

After all, they are both democrats.

Here us a bit of nutmeg for the pasta---Clintons legal issues will continue to grind at her and i think that while time ran out for bernie---time will eventually force her to pay the piper----and I continue to enjoy watching her squirm..

Regardless, we could have had Bernie as our candidate if it weren't for Hillary nose holding dupes...so thank you for giving us Donald trump-- you guys really helped our cause---you pooped in our own house....peee uuuuu!...

Hillary can not win Ohio and she cannot win Florida and she might lose to trump in PA where democrats out number Republicans 2 to 1-----how is that possible?
Hillary has been pandering to Florida for more than 15 years---- but she can't beat the hord of Republicans who will all coming out to deny her the chance to get the keys to the car.....thats enthusiasm in the opposite direction...
Plus Florida has far.more Republicans than democrats.

Trump will get Ohio and Florida no problem and perhaps one or two more swing states and then he is in---goddamnit!!!!

Surely, hopefully "a one termer".

But I still got popcorn and will continue to watch Clintons squirm sessions...errr "interviews"
Because---she a crook.

Oh yes, you all were right Clinton easily won the democratic nomination---- right----she had it wrapped up even before it started....it was so easy for her and clearly that prediction gave her the landslide vote she got right?

The FBI criminal investigation didn't hurt her chances a bit---you guys were right about that too......
LMFAO!!!!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on July 18, 2016, 07:23:57 PM
And pumas were a joke...they were in Obama's court because the were always in his court---they always vote Democrat...

Bernie supporters do not Always vote Democrat.

Some of us are libertarians who want peace...and non intervention.

So suck on that Liary Clinton shills!!!!!!!!

Do ya feel me now????

Do ya feel the Bern now?

You will after you dupes get Trump elected.

Jackasses!!!!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on July 19, 2016, 08:20:24 AM

Eg..lololol....not found in any periodical...lollol...in a group of 39 independents whom I know one third will be writing in bernies name....


There was so much goodness here I don't know where to start. But this was my favorite part.

You don't have a single friend, let alone 39. And I don't need a periodical to tell me that.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on July 19, 2016, 09:42:15 AM

Eg..lololol....not found in any periodical...lollol...in a group of 39 independents whom I know one third will be writing in bernies name....


There was so much goodness here I don't know where to start. But this was my favorite part.

You don't have a single friend, let alone 39. And I don't need a periodical to tell me that.


Lol, you took the bait--I am laughing at you because you dont see the worm "lololol" at the top if the hook

You are a media hype suckah.

Your prediction of the easy  coronation of Hillary and her automatic democratic nomination are what make you discredited.

Nobody is following this thread because of you, little man

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on July 19, 2016, 09:58:15 AM


Here is a rough estimate of some independents and democrats who were supporting Bernie in ca

30% jill Stein
20% stay home/focus on state local elections
20% Clinton
15% write in
8% trump
12% libertarian or something else.

Dont believe me just watch
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on July 19, 2016, 10:12:32 AM

Dont believe me

Never have truer words been spoken!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on July 19, 2016, 10:26:45 AM
Precious 8)..

Yeah, I was wrong about that FBI investigation right?  You know, the one you thought didn't exist.

You are in serious denial, lol.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on July 19, 2016, 10:38:50 AM
"Our job now is to see that platform implemented by a Democratic Senate, a Democratic House and a Hillary Clinton president – and I am going to be in every corner of this country to make sure that happens.

I have known Hillary Clinton for 25 years. We were a bit younger then. I remember her as a great first lady who broke precedent in terms of the role that a first lady was supposed to play as she helped lead the fight for universal health care. I served with her in the United States Senate and know her as a fierce advocate for the rights of children.

Hillary Clinton will make an outstanding president and I am proud to stand with her here today. Thank you all, very much!"

Feel the Bern!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on July 19, 2016, 10:46:18 AM
Loki thinks Bernie sanders was sheepdoggin'.  Now, that is precious. 
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on July 19, 2016, 10:55:22 AM
Loki thinks Bernie sanders was sheepdoggin'.  Now, that is precious.

Naw. What's precious is you thinking that anyone bothers with you, other than to mock you.

It's not like you're even making anyone angry, because to cause anger, you first have to be taken seriously.

Which means that even as a troll, you're a failure. You're more like a mascot.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on July 19, 2016, 05:47:32 PM
A mascot for what lead consumption awareness??
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on July 24, 2016, 02:22:04 PM
Hell NO! DNC, we WON'T vote for Hillary!!!!

Philly is hot but give up we will not!


Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on July 24, 2016, 02:24:30 PM
Hell, NO!!! DNC, we won't vote for Hi liar y!!!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on July 25, 2016, 11:34:03 AM
After scathing FBI condemnation of Clinton for lying and her gross negligence, overall incompetence, and Hawkish wsrmongering.....

The shite-in-her-adult diaper candidate is finished as far as many sanders supporters go....



Hilliary for PRISON!!!!!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on July 25, 2016, 11:35:09 AM
54444.😉
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on July 26, 2016, 09:23:49 PM

Eg..lololol....not found in any periodical...lollol...in a group of 39 independents whom I know one third will be writing in bernies name....


There was so much goodness here I don't know where to start. But this was my favorite part.

You don't have a single friend, let alone 39. And I don't need a periodical to tell me that.


Hey dimwit who doesn't look before he leaps....

Remember until you about democratic fracture....

Here it is come to fruition you stupid moron.




• Democrats struggle to unify.

Fractures in the party were exposed on Monday as supporters of Bernie Sanders booed when he urged them to vote for Hillary Clinton. They also booed Debbie Wasserman Schultz at a meeting of the delegation of her home-state, Florida, and even the pastor who delivered the convention’s invocation


A periodical...


Lolololololo
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on July 26, 2016, 09:45:02 PM
More fraction in Republican Party than Democrats. Bernie and ALL those who were prior runners in the primary back Hillary openly asking their supporters to vote for her.

Trumps former primary opponents refuse to endorse him and say that they fear W will be the last Republican President ever due to all of this.

Hillary could kill kittens on live TV and still win.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on July 26, 2016, 09:48:20 PM
Hahahahahhahhah!!!!

Yo, banana boy....You not too good at this....is yo?

When dain bramage happen for you?
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on July 26, 2016, 09:49:32 PM
The rise of Jill Stein!


Time to get paid.  8)
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on July 27, 2016, 03:55:48 PM
The rise of Jill Stein!


Time to get paid.  8)
The active socialists/third party who only associated with the democrats due to Bernie are going home to their coocoonests............so?
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on July 29, 2016, 12:19:03 PM
Wow!  DNC heckled down the crooked pipes with a corrupt lying warmongering candidate..

This is the democratic fracture I have been writing about.

Clinton was terrible and booed to submission...

With the revelation of a fixed election for Hillary...she has lost the race she was supposed to win easily...

With Jill Stein and write in votes and abstaining our angry 3rd party begins...

The DNC is to blame for trumps election and hopefully they will learn a lesson.

Feel the Bern.

It is obvious that Bernie was railroaded and images of him during Clintons croaking talk exposed his seething anger.

Corporate democrats suck it up..
And go fuch yourselves...

You, Hillary supporters and you alone are responsible for president trump.

Pop pop pop!!!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 01, 2016, 10:39:40 PM
One Bernie sanders supporter laid out the dark choices of going down either democratic or Republican party votes...

This election puts Donald trump--- who is akin to George Bush Jr.

VS.

Hillary Clinton who is like D ick Cheney.......

No way most of us Bernie supporters are going to vote for either idiot..

Jill Stein, and progressive candidates or Bernie write in vote-- depending on the state--or stay at home and watch both parties birn to the ground...

Lol. It's male private part Cheney vs. George Bush....

He hit the nail on the head because neither one is any good.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on August 02, 2016, 08:16:30 AM
One Bernie sanders supporter laid out the dark choices ...

Talking about yourself in the third person is the first sign of mental illness.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 02, 2016, 11:26:50 AM
One Bernie sanders supporter laid out the dark choices ...

Talking about yourself in the third person is the first sign of mental illness.

You whistle in dark, pookie.😉
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 03, 2016, 12:05:09 PM
As the Republican party gets trumped by a populist off the cuff- say anything-brutally forward-egocentric-anti establishment Democrat.
.....the democratic party is in the middle of a turning point to a real anti establishment progressive agenda despite its corporate candidate.

This will pass...

The third party alternatives to corporate shill Hillary are the new democratic party as the aging moderates decline...

So, just as Hillary Clinton doesn't represent the new left leaning democratic party and will suffer the fate of the splitting party the Republican party will have to wait until the next elections to shed itself from the parasite trump.

Too bad republicans--- you let trump in and you have to live with him-- like it or not.

Too bad democrats--you, your party and Hillary are going to have to live with trump as well because we are not voting for her.

So, which is the lesser of two evils---
Having George bush Jr. back in the oval office or putting warmonger Cheney in the Whitehouse...

I'll take my third party alternative or stay home and watch the real change begin!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 03, 2016, 12:09:40 PM
Watching both partys burn to the ground is par for the course with seeing hillarys career destroyed by the FBI.

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on August 03, 2016, 05:49:56 PM
Watching both partys burn to the ground is par for the course with seeing hillarys career destroyed by the FBI.

I agree. Becoming President is the low point of any politician's career. Brilliant analysis, as usual.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 03, 2016, 09:51:48 PM
Democrats and Republicans lose this one and yes Clintons career is over....the moment comey laid out the indictment.

These parties are burning to the ground...

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 03, 2016, 10:10:59 PM
Watching both partys burn to the ground is par for the course with seeing hillarys career destroyed by the FBI.

I agree. Becoming President is the low point of any politician's career. Brilliant analysis, as usual.

Your run for president is over if you can't win Ohio and Florida....and with Clintons incompetence, lies and corruption her career is over.

You are foolish if you think Clinton can win a state that she lost in the primaries to Bernie sanders and Florida is mostly registered Republicans this time around...

Ps. I'd love to see jill stein debate trump--- she'd wipe the floor with his tie.  Alas, the corporate establishment wont let our enthusiasm in and really rejects our 1%/occupy wall street rhetoric in reality....so why would they invite our new candidate to the table...

Maintain, you voted for hillary---trump is your daddy...lol!...

You maintain are responsible for letting him in the door....

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on August 04, 2016, 10:38:27 AM
Your run for president is over if you can't win Ohio and Florida....and with Clintons incompetence, lies and corruption her career is over.

Absolutely false. As usual, you're relying on what someone else told you and you haven't bothered to read the periodical yourself.

Clinton can LOSE Ohio, Florida, and just to make it interesting, Iowa, Nevada, and North Carolina, too. As long as she picks up Pennsylvania (where she is 5-6 points ahead), guess what? She's at 273.

Other combinations work, too.

Trump, OTOH, has to run the table on Ohio, Florida, and Pennsylvania to even have a shot. This last week has been brutal for him. Look at the polls. It seems highly unlikely that he'll suddenly turn it around and make up lost points.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 04, 2016, 11:54:36 AM
Your run for president is over if you can't win Ohio and Florida....and with Clintons incompetence, lies and corruption her career is over.

Absolutely false. As usual, you're relying on what someone else told you and you haven't bothered to read the periodical yourself.

Clinton can LOSE Ohio, Florida, and just to make it interesting, Iowa, Nevada, and North Carolina, too. As long as she picks up Pennsylvania (where she is 5-6 points ahead), guess what? She's at 273.

Other combinations work, too.

Trump, OTOH, has to run the table on Ohio, Florida, and Pennsylvania to even have a shot. This last week has been brutal for him. Look at the polls. It seems highly unlikely that he'll suddenly turn it around and make up lost points.


You really are naive....

Clintons will lose Ohio and florida- for sure...
Pennsylvania is a Democrat 2 to 1 state....trump doesn't need it

He got the job hungry rust belt wrapped up...

Maintain, you seem like a good kid but you have to stop watchin CNN...lol

Your brain is mush, darlin.

The political calculus doesn't add up for Clinton.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 04, 2016, 11:58:49 AM
Without us 99% occupy wall street vote Clintons career is over..

Plus! Plus! Plus!

You dont have a clue about the politically un engaged "silent majority?

This vote cannot be measured and guess what?

The silent majority is picking trump, for sure---Nate silver wont even talk about it because there is no way to measure it...

So keep sucking on crow.😉
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on August 04, 2016, 12:12:03 PM
Just checked, Clinton is now ahead in Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Florida. She's also ahead in Michigan and Wisconsin by even bigger margins.

Give me one piece of evidence to prove me wrong. One. Not your opinion, but actual evidence. My god, I hope I get to go up against you in court someday. Easiest win of my career.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 04, 2016, 12:24:42 PM
The silent majority are finished with the two corrupt parties--

The silent majority want actual change--NO politician--someone else because politicians screw them over.

The silent majority are sick if WAR!!!

The silent majority want JOBS and no more selling us out over seas...

The silent majority HATE political correctness----that is a big one!!!!!
Nate silver does not get this---and it CANNOT be measured.

The silent majority DO NOT vote in every election.

The LIES of the corporate media about a democratic party that speaks to them-- they call it the "new" silent majority is a fuchng bag full of shite and it doesn't add up--- its a con to get more Clinton supporters on board who are unenthused about her---- Clinton fatigue.

The silent majority dont care how you fix the problem....they just want it fixed-- they don't care about policy!!!!!

The silent majority dont like liars who have been caught repeatedly and they can smell corruption because they are thoughtful and not stupid and smell the Clinton con...

The silent majority are from many walks of life and have different ethnic backgrounds....thats one that CNN doesn't want you to know about.

The silent majority are sick and tired of being sold out and are above all

 Farigued by the BULLSHITE


Lesson over, class
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 04, 2016, 12:27:36 PM
Just checked, Clinton is now ahead in Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Florida. She's also ahead in Michigan and Wisconsin by even bigger margins.

Give me one piece of evidence to prove me wrong. One. Not your opinion, but actual evidence. My god, I hope I get to go up against you in court someday. Easiest win of my career.

I win cases I lose cases but based upon the your puerile opinion you would probably get sledged.

I'd fell you...this girls on fire!
😉
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on August 04, 2016, 01:48:28 PM
I lose cases

The only true thing you've said today.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 04, 2016, 03:20:33 PM
I lose cases


The only true thing you've said today.


...and, you are most assuredly, a fool.

Suck crow.

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on August 04, 2016, 03:23:23 PM
cin is a girl.........makes sense

only a little female dog who pretend internet posts (or even personality in general) would impact court outcomes.
idiot.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 04, 2016, 10:20:53 PM
cin is a girl.........makes sense

only a little female dog who pretend internet posts (or even personality in general) would impact court outcomes.
idiot.
[/quote/
cin is a girl.........makes sense

only a little female dog who pretend internet posts (or even personality in general) would impact court outcomes.
idiot.

Here me help.  Now you say more words. You look smarter now, Mr. tinypenis---

How long been window licker on short bus...since time discovered  tiny peepee? 

Dont feel bad...lots boys have tiny members.

Now you gonna be my little biatch.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 04, 2016, 11:09:12 PM
Alicia Garza, the founder of Blacks Lives Matter, discussed the Black Lives Matter movement and “systematic racism” in America with Bloomberg Businessweek. In her interview, she claimed that Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton does not back up her claims that she cares for the black community.

Garza said that the Clintons routinely use the black community for their own benefit.

“The Clintons use black people for votes, but then don’t do anything for black communities after they’re elected. They use us for photo ops,” Garza said.

Garza also had words for former President Bill Clinton, who she said angered her over a comment he made to black protesters. During a campaign event for Hillary Clinton, Black Lives Matter protesters interrupted Clinton’s event. Bill Clinton told the protesters that they were “defending the people who kill the lives you say matter.”
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on August 05, 2016, 08:40:24 AM
I lose cases

The only true thing you've said today.

You're kidding, right? Spicy Troll isn't an attorney!

After all, anyone who combines the emotional maturity of a spoiled six-year old with the internet acumen of your crazy grandfather isn't an attorney. Spicy Troll probably assumes this is the local newspaper ... sorry ... periodical commenting section.

That said, I did appreciate the unintentional comedy in someone who continually references the perfidy of Nixon, and then, without irony, employs the "silent majority" phrasing to back up their contentions. Good times!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 05, 2016, 11:23:53 AM
SANDERS SUPPORTERS

The GenForward poll, which was conducted before the political conventions, showed an uphill battle for Clinton in consolidating support among young people. Young people across racial and ethnic groups were more likely to support Sanders than Clinton in their primary contest, the poll shows. And among those who supported Sanders during the primary season, less than half were prepared to say they'll support Clinton over Trump in the fall. Still, few said they'd support Trump. The rest said they were undecided, will vote for a third-party candidate, or will not vote.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 05, 2016, 11:29:26 AM
I lose cases

The only true thing you've said today.

You're kidding, right? Spicy Troll isn't an attorney!

After all, anyone who combines the emotional maturity of a spoiled six-year old with the internet acumen of your crazy grandfather isn't an attorney. Spicy Troll probably assumes this is the local newspaper ... sorry ... periodical commenting section.

That said, I did appreciate the unintentional comedy in someone who continually references the perfidy of Nixon, and then, without irony, employs the "silent majority" phrasing to back up their contentions. Good times!

Lol. Silent majority different than southern strategy. I knew trip you up.  You not good at this.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 05, 2016, 12:53:39 PM
Trump will make a play for Michigan and Wisconson while Clinton wil try to reach out to working class European Americans...

The political fatigue has oxidized in this region.  While Obama bailed out the auto industry, lack of jobs will be the full story...the economy there has not improved and trump will push some jobs plan while Clinton will harp on policy-- trump will win this state by a whisper and give him the 279 electoral votes to win it..clinton will get 259...

The rest of the states will reflect 3rd party candidates and take votes from Clinton only... keeping a warmonger out of office.

Bernie won Indiana and trump will win there too. Plus Ohio and Florida will go to trump---


The one state trump may pick up although I think he'll lose it is wisconsin----that state has been a corporate media focus for the past 8 years...and labor issues are the primary focus also the 99%/ anti war vote will go heavily for stein there...not enough for Democrat, Trump to win😉

All else is status quo.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 05, 2016, 01:04:28 PM
The fuchheaded Hillary diaper bag media, who tried to subvert bernies campaign will keep saying that its close in pennsylvania---

But angry-trump doesn't have a chance there...clinton will win that state--no problem.

Clinton has Lost the European working class male vote to Trump and Jill Stein...she wont get it back.

Clinton also lost the educated European educated vote to jill stein and other 3rd party interests.

It's up to the women now....

Will it be Jill or Hill?

Can't wait for debates.

Trump will mop the floor with hillarys soiled diaper the way he mopped the floor with 16 Republicans and the way Bernie should have done.

If only Jill stein could be on the debate stage---she could white out trump with honest principle unsullied by corruption, lies and disingenuous empty rhetoric.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on August 05, 2016, 01:33:48 PM
I lose cases

The only true thing you've said today.

You're kidding, right? Spicy Troll isn't an attorney!

After all, anyone who combines the emotional maturity of a spoiled six-year old with the internet acumen of your crazy grandfather isn't an attorney. Spicy Troll probably assumes this is the local newspaper ... sorry ... periodical commenting section.

That said, I did appreciate the unintentional comedy in someone who continually references the perfidy of Nixon, and then, without irony, employs the "silent majority" phrasing to back up their contentions. Good times!

Lol. Silent majority different than southern strategy. I knew trip you up.  You not good at this.

Is it actually possible for you to be less intelligent? I think not.

https://chnm.gmu.edu/hardhats/silent.html
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on August 05, 2016, 08:50:35 PM
I lose cases

The only true thing you've said today.

You're kidding, right? Spicy Troll isn't an attorney!

After all, anyone who combines the emotional maturity of a spoiled six-year old with the internet acumen of your crazy grandfather isn't an attorney. Spicy Troll probably assumes this is the local newspaper ... sorry ... periodical commenting section.

That said, I did appreciate the unintentional comedy in someone who continually references the perfidy of Nixon, and then, without irony, employs the "silent majority" phrasing to back up their contentions. Good times!

You act like you never go outside.
That's like the people who say "no soldier would" or "no cop would"............think about all the idiots you know Now imagine them online without a filter.

Albeit I could see it becoming disbarred in the near future for trying to sneak meth suppositories into court for CASA cases
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 05, 2016, 10:16:01 PM
I lose cases

The only true thing you've said today.

You're kidding, right? Spicy Troll isn't an attorney!

After all, anyone who combines the emotional maturity of a spoiled six-year old with the internet acumen of your crazy grandfather isn't an attorney. Spicy Troll probably assumes this is the local newspaper ... sorry ... periodical commenting section.

That said, I did appreciate the unintentional comedy in someone who continually references the perfidy of Nixon, and then, without irony, employs the "silent majority" phrasing to back up their contentions. Good times!

Lol. Silent majority different than southern strategy. I knew trip you up.  You not good at this.

Is it actually possible for you to be less intelligent? I think not.

https://chnm.gmu.edu/hardhats/silent.html

You truly are dense. You get tripped up by stupid shite. Clean the racism out of your thick ears. 

The southern strategy is different than the silent majority. 

Two different things.  This has been argued unsuccessfully many times.

Ronald Reagan was elected because of the silent majority as well so so puddinhead...wheres your southern strategy there.

Get out u moms basement and stop drinking democratic "slave party" corporate establishment koolaide.

Your problem lol us that you generalize too much and are too lazy to get into specifics.

Most, but not all of the Reagan democrats---were Catholics....

I'll repeat that since you are dense...

Most, but not all of the Reagan democrats were Catholics....pro life Catholics.....a huge part of the silent majority...and they don't always vocalize their distrust and anger.

Get it? Tasshat???

Stupid troll
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 05, 2016, 10:22:17 PM
I lose cases

The only true thing you've said today.

You're kidding, right? Spicy Troll isn't an attorney!

After all, anyone who combines the emotional maturity of a spoiled six-year old with the internet acumen of your crazy grandfather isn't an attorney. Spicy Troll probably assumes this is the local newspaper ... sorry ... periodical commenting section.

That said, I did appreciate the unintentional comedy in someone who continually references the perfidy of Nixon, and then, without irony, employs the "silent majority" phrasing to back up their contentions. Good times!

You act like you never go outside.
That's like the people who say "no soldier would" or "no cop would"............think about all the idiots you know Now imagine them online without a filter.

Albeit I could see it becoming disbarred in the near future for trying to sneak meth suppositories into court for CASA cases

You act like you dont know what letters strung together mean...those are words.

And put a straw man in a field to keep crows away and put punctuation in straw man arguments.

How shortbus today?  Get any good licks?
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 05, 2016, 10:28:40 PM
I lose cases

The only true thing you've said today.

You're kidding, right? Spicy Troll isn't an attorney!

After all, anyone who combines the emotional maturity of a spoiled six-year old with the internet acumen of your crazy grandfather isn't an attorney. Spicy Troll probably assumes this is the local newspaper ... sorry ... periodical commenting section.

That said, I did appreciate the unintentional comedy in someone who continually references the perfidy of Nixon, and then, without irony, employs the "silent majority" phrasing to back up their contentions. Good times!

Lol. Silent majority different than southern strategy. I knew trip you up.  You not good at this.

Is it actually possible for you to be less intelligent? I think not.

https://chnm.gmu.edu/hardhats/silent.html

You truly are dense. You get tripped up by stupid shite. Clean the racism out of your thick ears. 

The southern strategy is different than the silent majority. 

Two different things.  This has been argued unsuccessfully many times.

Ronald Reagan was elected because of the silent majority as well so so puddinhead...wheres your southern strategy there.

Get out u moms basement and stop drinking democratic "slave party" corporate establishment koolaide.

Your problem lol us that you generalize too much and are too lazy to get into specifics.

Most, but not all of the Reagan democrats---were Catholics....

I'll repeat that since you are dense...

Most, but not all of the Reagan democrats were Catholics....pro life Catholics.....a huge part of the silent majority...and they don't always vocalize their distrust and anger.

Get it? Tasshat???

Stupid troll

Your pickled racism only keeps you in a pickle....and makes you sound sour.  Blame the sun for everything at least you'll be right once everyday and it will explain your overexposure to stupid, general and facile arguments.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 05, 2016, 11:08:41 PM

[/quote]

Is it actually possible for you to be less intelligent? I think not.

https://chnm.gmu.edu/hardhats/silent.html
[/quote]

Your article has nothing to do with southern strategy...you obviously missed the point.

Here, you are lazy but I'm going to educate you right now...

First, go back and read my specifics regarding the "general vast silent majority"...

Then look these guys up, because some people forget where it all began and who was involved because of....you guessed it....the corporate modern democratic party koolaide drinkers

Everrett Dirksen, Thomas Kuchel,    Thruston Morton

And Richard Russel Jr.
Oh yeah, and oxy-moron Howard Smith
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 06, 2016, 08:03:52 AM
Oh yeah, lol almost forgot William Moore McCullach...

Now get off mommas couch...stop being lazy....and educate yourself.

Pit koolside down...

I'm not laughing at you now, lol. 
Unless you fix your spotty education you are about as pathetic as most of the saps who drink at the corporate Republican / estblishment Democratic parties.

Let me know how goes...

Prediction: You will blow your homework off and fall to hypochorisms and your typical "troll  talk"....

Then again you are a troll...hahahaaH.😎
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on August 06, 2016, 11:05:02 PM
I lose cases

The only true thing you've said today.

You're kidding, right? Spicy Troll isn't an attorney!

After all, anyone who combines the emotional maturity of a spoiled six-year old with the internet acumen of your crazy grandfather isn't an attorney. Spicy Troll probably assumes this is the local newspaper ... sorry ... periodical commenting section.

That said, I did appreciate the unintentional comedy in someone who continually references the perfidy of Nixon, and then, without irony, employs the "silent majority" phrasing to back up their contentions. Good times!

You act like you never go outside.
That's like the people who say "no soldier would" or "no cop would"............think about all the idiots you know Now imagine them online without a filter.

Albeit I could see it becoming disbarred in the near future for trying to sneak meth suppositories into court for CASA cases

You act like you dont know what letters strung together mean...those are words.

And put a straw man in a field to keep crows away and put punctuation in straw man arguments.

How shortbus today?  Get any good licks?
Julie.........please stop pretending you know grammar or wtf strawman is..........
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on August 07, 2016, 09:13:53 AM
Julie.........please stop pretending you know grammar or wtf strawman is..........

It is Julie!

Julie, you shouldn't have reverted back to your old syntax patterns. Too easy.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on August 08, 2016, 10:06:48 AM
Julie.........please stop pretending you know grammar or wtf strawman is..........

It is Julie!

Julie, you shouldn't have reverted back to your old syntax patterns. Too easy.

Story time?
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on August 08, 2016, 10:09:38 AM
Oh ... Julie Fern.

Ha!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 08, 2016, 02:35:00 PM
I lose cases

The only true thing you've said today.

You're kidding, right? Spicy Troll isn't an attorney!

After all, anyone who combines the emotional maturity of a spoiled six-year old with the internet acumen of your crazy grandfather isn't an attorney. Spicy Troll probably assumes this is the local newspaper ... sorry ... periodical commenting section.

That said, I did appreciate the unintentional comedy in someone who continually references the perfidy of Nixon, and then, without irony, employs the "silent majority" phrasing to back up their contentions. Good times!

You act like you never go outside.
That's like the people who say "no soldier would" or "no cop would"............think about all the idiots you know Now imagine them online without a filter.

Albeit I could see it becoming disbarred in the near future for trying to sneak meth suppositories into court for CASA cases

You act like you dont know what letters strung together mean...those are words.

And put a straw man in a field to keep crows away and put punctuation in straw man arguments.

How shortbus today?  Get any good licks?
Julie.........please stop pretending you know grammar or wtf strawman is..........

You miss shortbus today?  You lick basement windows mommas house.
Give dainbramage.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 08, 2016, 02:37:36 PM
You folks really are not good with evidence and facts.

Julie love Hillary.
CinSyn think Hillary career never happen.  Hiliary political toast.
Can't wait for debate.
Trump, Stein smell hiliary's dirty underpants.

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on August 08, 2016, 03:05:31 PM
You folks really are not good with evidence and facts.

Julie love Hillary.
CinSyn think Hillary career never happen.  Hiliary political toast.
Can't wait for debate.
Trump, Stein smell hiliary's dirty underpants.
No one said you were sane or lacked your love of sockpuppets
didn't you also used to pretend to be a "sonofapickle" and some weird blue starwars avatar with full voice box sounds in the posts?

seek help freak.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 09, 2016, 12:40:17 PM
Julie.........please stop pretending you know grammar or wtf strawman is..........

It is Julie!

Julie, you shouldn't have reverted back to your old syntax patterns. Too easy.

Story time?

Here story, Southern strategy myth featuring democrat George Wallace.

Why lazy? You fan male private part Cheney?
Warmonger not becoming president.

Lol argument dry up?😉
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 09, 2016, 12:42:55 PM
JILL not Hill!!!!😊
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 09, 2016, 12:46:27 PM
You folks really are not good with evidence and facts.

Julie love Hillary.
CinSyn think Hillary career never happen.  Hiliary political toast.
Can't wait for debate.
Trump, Stein smell hiliary's dirty underpants.
No one said you were sane or lacked your love of sockpuppets
didn't you also used to pretend to be a "sonofapickle" and some weird blue starwars avatar with full voice box sounds in the posts?

seek help freak.

No one say you crazy make you stop window licking.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on August 09, 2016, 09:16:29 PM
Julie have no friends.

Julie 45 year old man living in parents basement. Maybe parolee.

Julie pathetic loser for ever.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 09, 2016, 09:20:03 PM
Wow! Hillary Clinton will need all of Marco rubios votes if she wants to beat trump in Florida.

The numbers are just not there for her compared to the Republican side.

Her main problem is that she has NO enthusiasm whatsoever and people will sit thus one out.

The ny times, wash post, CNN and NBC are doing a wonderful job of trying to demonize trump--but it is not convincing.  His supporters are not looking for a politician--
Just like us Stein/Sanders supporters were not looking for an establishment democrat--we want radical change to our country and the two party system

We do not like warmongers and Clinton is number 1 warmonger.

Also, if you look at the elections from 2008, 2012 the party votes were mostly Democrat then Republicans and dems were close in 2012 but dems had the enthusiasm with Obama..... .but this time, 2016 the Republican voters or should I say republican/ independent and democratic voters are out numbering establishment democrats by about 500,000 votes.

I dont think the corporate media can drum up enough voters for her.

In fact, even a lefty like myself knows that trump was suggesting that 2nd amendment activists need to take the cause to the polls..

Trying to paint trump as something he is not does not work.

We know that despite his bigoted comments he is trying to brownnose Putin and thought going into Iraq and Libya was a dangerous and stupid decision...no way the new York times can spin this.

Clinton hasn't seen an opportunity for regime change and dictator removal she doesn't like....except if it involves her Saudi Arabian regime underwriters.

HA!

The more corporate party corruption I see the more easy I am with a trump presidency.  Plus half the bigoted shite he is perpetrating will never get past congress.....after the DNC fixed the election for Clinton and sabotaged Bernie---I, along with others dont give a shite about party unity!!!!!

That is a solid point!
I'm seriously cynical and don't care if trump wins. 
I'd rather win the marathon than the 4year dash.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 10, 2016, 11:26:17 AM
Julie have no friends.

Julie 45 year old man living in parents basement. Maybe parolee.

Julie pathetic loser for ever.

Maintain, stop being a puerile chump, girl.

Use facts and logic.  I am not Julie fern....just very smart....

Think about it, I DO NOT like hillllry Clinton in the slightest.  And Julie fern loved hrc so much he called her hrc....also he still has a quote about her in his tiny toeprint ..

Get off your phat democratic sludgewallowing well azz and do some research.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 10, 2016, 12:49:01 PM
Trump leads Clinton anon independents 54 to 34. In swing states.

Trump is ahead in Florida and Ohio and when 3rd party candidates are factored in he leads by more.

This is despite the national corporate media spin polling which claims Clinton is ahead by 10 points....big deal---swing states count not ny or ca or tx.

Trump cleverly targets all 2nd amendment voters who see a Hillary Clinton appointee to the supreme court as a danger to their gun rights---if you live in Alaska or Montana or mountain regions you need guns to survive--NYC gun advocates are scarce because for one thing there are no bear and you just call the cops.  No need to bear arms in Philly or Detroit...

So, by making the election partially about who trump will push for the supreme court he speaks directly to the entire right wing of the Republican party and enthuses them to exercise the voting rights....they WILL vote early and often to protect that second amendment.

Clintons gatherings have small crowd gatherings unlike Bernie sanders and Donald trump.

There is the Obama economy and Clinton has no enthusiasm...

She is toast
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 21, 2016, 10:09:15 PM
One associate recently compared Hillary Clinton to D ick Cheney---because they are warmongers and he compared Donald Trump to George Bush Jr. Because they are both goofy and daft and it is a worthy comparison.

But I see these two the way I perceive many voters who will go for flash, cult of personality, and slickness over substance, mundane reality and policy.

On these two lines of psychological perception we have JFK vs. RMN.

...JFK will win everytime...

..guess who is whom with regard to this election.

...the fickle polls are manipulated right now...but the amount of people who came out to vote in swing states for the Republican and Democratic primaries dont lie.

Enthusiasm in this election and gut perception of "a winner" is only on one side this year.

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 22, 2016, 10:26:02 PM
Here's one for noseholding corporate democratic koolaide drinkers like maintain to answer.

But she wont.

Would you vote for someone who supported the war in Iraq or one that would dare?

Maintain will hold her nose and expose herself to hypocrisy... Typical dolt corporate democrats are alike.

If Hillary Clinton was supposed to run away with this election starting with the democratic primary--- when the fix was in and the FBI let her off the hook on her criminal activities---

How come she didnt--Bernie kicked her ass.

And truthfully, people like koolaid drinking hilleristas cant explain why trump is tied with her in some polls...losing to him when 3rd party candidates are counted...

Shouldn't Hillary be running away with this election????

But she is not.

And she WILL lose to Trump----the democratic party can't fix the enthusiasm gap with their folks who vote multiple times.

Not this time anyway...

Trump has Florida wrapped up with 700,000 more voters than in 2012.

Face it the cult of personality will drive people to the polls for trump in Ohio Michigan indiananand Florida...trump will come close in pa.   

Why? Jobs, poor obama/clinton economy, and cult of personality..

Oh yeah, Hillary Clinton herself is a factor for her lack of numbers....and has destroyed her own career beyond repair---emails, classified information crimes, and pay to play politics...

So, hilarista nose holding koolaid drinking people like maintain..
Keep thinking you are right...thats what Donal and Jill want.

Ha!😉
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on August 23, 2016, 11:46:53 AM
Julie still low information voter.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 24, 2016, 12:03:37 PM
Julie still low information voter.

Yes, I agree with you on that one thing....

Julie fern like most crooked hilliary shills are low information voters.

At least we know now---that you are self aware that you have no clue what you are doing.

Finally we agree. 
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 24, 2016, 12:11:21 PM
Donald trump speaks the truth and lays out the facts regarding some urban and city dwelling African Americans and the European American corporate media ignorantly tries to downplay or discredit their issues---

Clintons have  always trying to keep the black man down and take their vote for granted.
 
Bills penal laws crushed African American males opportunities... And hilliary gins up fake "black accent" and thinks their children are superpreditors....

With friends like this no wonder nothing has changed.

Trump is 100% correct.

Racism was invented by the democratic party and continues today..
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on August 24, 2016, 01:38:46 PM
Thank you, Julie.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 29, 2016, 10:23:34 PM
...silenced by the power of the third party vote.

Jill not hill.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 29, 2016, 10:38:24 PM
Donald Trump is ahead if Hillary Clinton by 700,000 votes in Florida.

He is ahead by 400,000 votes in Ohio.

He is ahead by 200,000 votes in Michigan.

He is ahead by 300,000 votes in Indiana

Trump is ahead of the other candidate by 50,000 votes in north Carolina.

Trump is behind by 100,000 votes in Pennsylvania.

All trump needs to do is embarrass Mrs. Clinton on September 26th with a strong debate and it will be over for her....no matter hw hard the wash post, ny times, NBC, CNN, and wall st journal try they cant fight


.....enthusiasm with phony unimportant flouted poll numbers and a plethora of periodicals devoted to racism..

I'm a progressive and i don't even buy into it...

Th multitude of voters this year d ok nt give a shite about racism....its jobs jobs jobs and the clinton/obama economy----  $tupid.

...so hilliaristas....

Put the big girl pants on, pat yourself on the back and give yourself a round of applause for getting Donald trump elected office for the next 4 years...


...hey, we could have a real changemaker/ feminist like Jill Stein...

...you koolaide democrats threw away Bernie sanders... We are throwing you and your party away..

Dont believe me..just watch!


Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 29, 2016, 11:10:03 PM
....so that's a tie you say between trump and Clinton?  Not so fast. I left one swing state out of the equation which gives the election to him...

I bet no one can guess which it is.

Muhuhaha.

Just cynical, I guess

Meh.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 31, 2016, 10:29:56 AM
Ooooooops.

From emails Mrs Hillary deleted the state department has found information responsive to Benghazi.....

So, ultimately Benghazi and hilarys Iraq war vote will be her undoing

Nixon had Watergate and Clinton has Benghazi...

These two tragic figures will go down as being the most corrupt..

Fun to watch her career end with a fizzle.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on September 03, 2016, 11:44:06 AM
Just read FBI information on Mrs hillarys interrogation...

She must have mental health problems and probably shouldn't be running for any public servant jobs.

She claimed not to know what she was doing with regard to classified info.

She could not recall simple details about important war activities nor comprehend the consequences of her actions.

No way at this point is she more qualified than Donald trump.

Face facts- Hillary is not up to being a civil servant on even a local level.

Jill not Hill!!!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on September 03, 2016, 01:37:51 PM
To those hundreds of folks who check into this thread and have been following this political journey you know I've been right on with most of it.  The trolls dont comment anymore. ..since they were wrong about the fbi criminal investigation.....most have been silenced into submission.



Hillary Clinton is very sick for sure.
Mental illness along with corruption is going to take her out of the election.

She has been sick all week and cannot even stand to take reporters questions..

She refuses to do a real press conference...she cant answer their questions and has no energy to do it.

She is burnt out.

Reporters have been questioning kaine about her that he has to answer the question for her.

It's bad folks....but so much pop corn enjoyed as we watch her fall


Pop pop pop!! Drop drip drop...


Bye bye hiliary.....you sick 
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on September 05, 2016, 11:03:56 PM
So, now you see he right I am.

Clinton was sick all week....then shows up with some airplane bullshite press...

Shows how sick she is....

Can't even speak....

Coughing...coughing...coughin ng.

Trump is right----she is not uo to the task required of her....but then again-- her lying ass never was up to it

She's been sick all week and will continue to fail.

Pop pop pop
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on September 05, 2016, 11:05:41 PM
62450
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on September 07, 2016, 11:21:44 AM
Thank you, Julie.


Here is the hiliaristas candidate......



 Hillary Clinton--The Crooked Cougher with the Crooked Coffers,
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on September 07, 2016, 11:24:49 AM
Who is The Crooked Cougher with The Crooked Coffers?
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on September 07, 2016, 08:46:21 PM
Can't deny it, Julie. That's pretty funny.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on September 08, 2016, 10:12:12 AM
To those hundreds of folks who check into this thread

I think Julie needs a wellness check.

I think, like, five people read this thread. Julie, and four people to make fun of her.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on September 08, 2016, 05:59:47 PM
I wonder how many other sites she does this on?

It's sad.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on September 10, 2016, 09:18:13 AM
63372

Really, lol?

You are an idiot with terrible advice and a looser in that you cant count how many people view this thread.

From Sept 5th...at least 1000.

You stupid koolaide drinking duper...
To those hundreds of folks who check into this thread

I think Julie needs a wellness check.

I think, like, five people read this thread. Julie, and four people to make fun of her.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on September 10, 2016, 09:39:09 AM
...julie fern...what a joke.

That putz loved hiliary. 

Hows Hillary doing in Ohio and Florida?

Wish Bernie was still around cause Hillary ain't gonna beat trump.😉
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on September 10, 2016, 11:20:33 AM
disestablishmentarianisn

The Bernie sanders, Donald trump and disenfranchised electorate.

Watch how a campaign about C change sparked a democratic party civil war.

Watch how a famous tv/periodical realtor took over the Republican party.

Many independents and the unvoting silent majority...

Some who liked Barry Goldwater, Richard Nixon, Ross Perot, Ronald Reagan, Bernie Sanders, and Donald Trunp.

Those who really do not want an establishment candidate...someone entirely different.

Who better than someone who will support the burning blue livid fire engulfing and scarlet lava of antiestablishment ignited.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on September 10, 2016, 06:18:57 PM
63372

Really, lol?

You are an idiot with terrible advice and a looser in that you cant count how many people view this thread.

From Sept 5th...at least 1000.

You stupid koolaide drinking duper...
To those hundreds of folks who check into this thread

I think Julie needs a wellness check.

I think, like, five people read this thread. Julie, and four people to make fun of her.
looser huh.........is this building up to a momma joke...........?
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on September 11, 2016, 09:09:41 AM
....sick all of last week...
....sick this week...

HRC......its over.

Pop pop pop.

Drip drip drip

Goodbye ma'm....just like Nixon.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on September 12, 2016, 07:26:40 PM
....sick all of last week...
....sick this week...

HRC......its over.

Pop pop pop.

Drip drip drip

Goodbye ma'm....just like Nixon.
Nixon.........was sick now?
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on September 12, 2016, 07:27:43 PM
....sick all of last week...
....sick this week...

HRC......its over.

Pop pop pop.

Drip drip drip

Goodbye ma'm....just like Nixon.
Nixon.........was sick now?
And Nixon WON his second election after losing the first shot at it.........omgosh........She IS like Nixon huh!?!??!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on September 14, 2016, 01:37:07 PM
...so, Clinton was sicK after all.  The crooked coffer with the crooked coffers, like Nixon is experiencing her political tires relieved of their gas....slowly, painfully, like Nixon who rode a wave of inevitability.

...she kept secret correspondence...like Nixon....she was up to crooked schemes, like Nixon spying in on his political foes...

Both Nixon and Clintons demise began right after a major debacle...
For Nixon it was Watergate ( he claimed he had nothing to do with it---yet knew everything)
For Clinton it was Benghazi ( she claimed she had nothing to do with it--yet knew everything)

Both candidates had their careers slowly ended in political shame.

Clintons political death is now showing the blood from the wound with polls in Ohio and Florida turning to trump as the united states says goodbye to a halfwit/hairbrained/ greedy/ corrupt
Political hack....

Who's only claim of accomplishments is pushing for an upper east side of Manhattan subway line....that had destroyed businesses along its path...and may take years to finish....

Pop pop pop

So, was I right about Clinton being sick or not?  Was i right about the FBI criminal investigation or not.

If Clinton was a sure thing...ask yourself,  was cinnamon right?  She was doomed way back???? Was she doomed?  Yes!

...trump would not have been able to beat Bernie sanders....face the facts.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on September 14, 2016, 01:41:36 PM
....sick all of last week...
....sick this week...

HRC......its over.

Pop pop pop.

Drip drip drip

Goodbye ma'm....just like Nixon.
Nixon.........was sick now?
.........omgosh........She IS like Nixon !

Yes, you are having an epiphany.........you now know

.............she IS like Nixon
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on September 14, 2016, 06:19:46 PM
so you admit she'll win the election then........the genius is strong with Julie.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on September 16, 2016, 11:25:03 AM
so you admit she'll win the election then........the genius is strong with Julie.

No, like Nixon around this time in 1974 it was over for him; its over for her.

Look dumdum...clinton is now losing Nevada. 

It's going to be President Trump.

Clinton is political toast...like Nixon.

The brain is weak with you, son. ;)
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on September 16, 2016, 12:16:02 PM
Here is a conundrum for the bigoted, corporate, corrupt democratic party...

Also a problem for Politicus, Media Matters, CNN, NBC, Washington post, New York Times...

Looks like I scooped you all!!!

From an old friend of mine...On law school discussion board who p.m. Me....

B.W.

synucleinopathy

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on September 16, 2016, 12:26:41 PM
64912...

Lets get to 66000 by Tuesday.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on September 22, 2016, 07:00:24 AM
Hillary Clinton's mental illness is affecting her eyes.  Her coughing, her lung issues ate tied to synucleinopahy.

Cancelling events....lets see if she shows up to debate Trump or cancels.


...looks like its over for her...any thoughts from the hilliaristas????

No?

That's what I thought...
66000 on Saturday.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on October 04, 2016, 09:06:47 PM
It is really quite simple.  At the too soon to tell moment we have fragmentation.  This election will come down to who garners the most enthusiasm and like howard dean and Barack Obama right now only sanders is lighting any fires.  Contrasting and most interesting is the lack of enthusiasm on Clintons side.  As an independent  I can tell you  I don't like the Bush/Clinton option.  Clintons ethics are damaging and Bush's connection to iraq is problematic.  Don't know how other independents feel but the "inevitability" moniker creates a sour choice to most of the independents I know.

Ask yourself this? If both pubs and dems are divided down the middle do you really think enthusiasm will be there for two families that have been creeping around the wings of the Oval Office since the 90's???

Also, I think the pulse of the electorate is still charging toward something newer and different--we have obama to thank for that.

This is for the idiot who still trolls this thread named loki.

Loki the fool. 😉

Remember when I wrote this, dum dum...way back machine...

You are a "just so" person yourself...

How ironic.lmao!!!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on October 09, 2016, 09:12:16 PM
Trump is all male chauvinist pig about women
But Hillary destroyed women who had problems with her husband.

Trumps words regarding women make him a dog but clintons actions toward women proves she is a cold, disgusting, cantankerous female dog-dog.

Voters know hillary has been up to shite for 30 years...


I have decided tonight not to endorsed Jill Stein.

Our country cannot afford to have that woman serve any more time, but perhaps in her mansion baking cookies that no intelligent person should eat.


We need change--no special interest controls donald trump... He is not a warmonger.

My state is a swing state and I'm not voting for Jill Stein...

I'm voting for donald trump----

The rest of the hillary dupes can suck on that change of events.


No one owns trump he gets my vote.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on October 09, 2016, 09:15:05 PM
Amazing!

I've gone from being so engaged with Bernie Sanders and his beautiful ideas and message and finally reality hit.  I needed to go with Jill, who shares Bernie's mantle.

But now I think our country needs someone who actually cares and can't be bought.

We need change, real change.

Trumps my boy because we can't afford hilliary and her lies.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on October 09, 2016, 09:17:33 PM
Lol!  I'm a cynical socialist---so cynical I'm voting for a radical populist.

Laughing so hard at this.

I will laugh harder if pennsylvania picks trump.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on October 09, 2016, 09:20:40 PM
umps words regarding women make him a dog but clintons actions toward women proves she is a cold, disgusting, cantankerous  b itch-dog.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on October 10, 2016, 05:44:03 AM
Another reason I'm switching from Jill stein to Donald Trump is simple.....

No one has ever had the guts to call Hillary Clinton a liar to her face.

Trump won the debate hands down, he changed my mind about who I was voting for and he called Clinton out as a liar....he called her out for what when truly is.

That is what we need as a commander in chief....

Not another apologist and certainly not a power hungry lying sack of shite!!!

He earned my vote with his strong words of bareknuckle facts--Hillary is a liar and exposed as one before millions of viewers
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on October 10, 2016, 08:17:06 PM
Best political zinger since Ronald Reagan famously said, "there you go again."

Best political rhetoric😏 all year.!!!

Donald Trump retort to Clintons faux, phony, fake self righteousness.....

"BECAUSE YOU'D BE IN JAIL"


Awesome comeback line....thats what changed my mind---this fucher means ACTION!!

No bank owns him and he's teddy Roosevelt and Andrew Jackson all rolled into one.

68000
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on October 10, 2016, 08:18:23 PM
Sorry 60121😏. My bad guys.

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on October 11, 2016, 11:50:06 AM
Lemme guess, is Trump "Poised to win California"?
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on October 15, 2016, 10:28:51 AM
There is a 100% chance that after Hillary wins next month that we can a "poppop" about how her pending (whatever,etc, vomit)
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Phidippides on October 20, 2016, 09:38:44 PM
Lol!  I'm a cynical socialist---so cynical I'm voting for a radical populist.

Laughing so hard at this.

I will laugh harder if pennsylvania picks trump.

Dream on. Trump will lose every northeastern state as well as Virginia and North Carolina.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on October 20, 2016, 10:11:20 PM
Lol!  I'm a cynical socialist---so cynical I'm voting for a radical populist.

Laughing so hard at this.

I will laugh harder if pennsylvania picks trump.

Dream on. Trump will lose every northeastern state as well as Virginia and North Carolina.

It's not a dream.  If my girl, Jill wins It'll be a dream.

If Trump wins, I will laugh so hard-- because, I'm going to vote for him out of spite.

Lmfao!!!

Also, I'm voting for him because of the way he took her down in the three debates.

The last two debates he annihilated her--he essential called her out as the lying, cheating, war mongering illegal same old do nothing shite that she is.

He summed it up with two words many, many, many of us independents think...

She is a "nasty woman" and now she has been painted white with guilt....much like her pantsuit.

Trump will win the rust belt states, north Carolina and Florida... Plus Arizona and..the clincher....IOWA...



Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on October 20, 2016, 10:15:08 PM
...dont believe me?  Somebody is listening and reading because this thread.....and this thread only gets the most play on LSD.

And it ain't just lil old me.

Clinton is screwed.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on October 20, 2016, 10:16:33 PM
72370.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Phidippides on October 21, 2016, 02:34:30 AM
You're confusing what you want to happen with what's actually going to happen.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on October 21, 2016, 09:30:35 PM
You're confusing what you want to happen with what's actually going to happen.
you spelt your name wrong...............Pheidippi des
you can change it FYI
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Phidippides on October 22, 2016, 12:01:06 AM
I wouldn't say it's wrong, plenty of reputable sources spell it that way. Plus, it looks cooler, at least in my opinion.

https://www.pbs.org/empires/thegreeks/background/15_p1.html (https://www.pbs.org/empires/thegreeks/background/15_p1.html)

I chose the name since I'm a long-distance runner (and also a conservative who's NOT voting for Trump!)

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on October 22, 2016, 12:26:52 PM
I chose the name since I'm a long-distance runner (and also a conservative who's NOT voting for Trump!)

Which makes sense, since Trump is NOT a conservative. Policy wise, he and Clinton have more in common then they'd like to admit.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on October 23, 2016, 07:02:28 PM
I wouldn't say it's wrong, plenty of reputable sources spell it that way. Plus, it looks cooler, at least in my opinion.

https://www.pbs.org/empires/thegreeks/background/15_p1.html (https://www.pbs.org/empires/thegreeks/background/15_p1.html)

I chose the name since I'm a long-distance runner (and also a conservative who's NOT voting for Trump!)
what does one have to do with the other?
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on October 24, 2016, 08:06:40 AM
71516

Corruption....exposed and pay-to-play at the level of secretary of state.

I'm amazed that Americans dont really want the two parties knocked to the ground and shaken up.

.....surprises unfolding.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on October 25, 2016, 05:00:06 AM
Looks like Terry McAuliffe paid off FBI investigator McCabe's wife campaign funds---so he would let Clinton escape charges...

Hillary helped get Terry elected and now Terrys bribing cops wives to get Hillary elected.

Donald Trump is right about crooked Hillary...

Lets watch how the ny times and wash post try to bury the corruption.

This is why people like Donald trump....he is not a polished corrupt politician.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on October 30, 2016, 07:39:10 PM
 8)

73425

Maintain, lol, and missa Hiliary supporters...

FBI got her just like I said they would and her fate is like richard nixon...

Her career is over.

Like nixon, she did it to herself
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on October 30, 2016, 07:39:45 PM
 ;)
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on November 02, 2016, 07:35:51 AM
It's all about North Carolina for clinton....

She needs the african/carribean american vote or she is done.

Most independents are looking to a corruption free---criminal investigation free--aggressive radical change.

That is what is driving the trump vote

I myself went from a few choices and decided to cast my vote for donald trump!

This man, unlike barak Obama---is not all talk...

He will fuching shake the shite out of washington!!!

Trump will take on the corrupt Democratic Party

And we independents love the fact that he won't take any bullshite from republicans


So mrs. Hillary fans....do us all a favor....stay home on Election Day...

We don't need another nixon


I already voted for trump


Imagine---a libertarian progressive voting for trump...
Such on that for the next week.....

FBI..

Pop, pop,pop

Lmfao
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on November 02, 2016, 04:37:13 PM
LMAO, the only way you already voted is if you are elderly or a gimp. Jump off a cliff dude.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on November 06, 2016, 08:23:22 PM
I'm just watching Michagan.

If trump wins Michagan...it's over with 275 electoral votes.

North Carolina would be icing on the cake.

FBI pop pop pop.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on November 06, 2016, 08:25:00 PM
74606
 

1000 in a few days...wishew!

A lot of ayes,

Aye think its interesting all the wonderment.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on November 07, 2016, 09:43:12 AM
Too bad he's behind in Michigan, Florida, and Pennsylvania.

No Cinnamon, this race will be called pretty early. He'll lose Florida. Not by much, but he'll lose it. After that, he's done. He'd have to pull off an upset in Michigan and Pennsylvania, something like that. Not gonna happen.

Just curious, what will you do when HRC becomes POTUS? I'm not exactly happy about it myself, but what will your narrative be then? Let me guess, it was rigged?
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on November 07, 2016, 01:59:36 PM
Too bad he's behind in Michigan, Florida, and Pennsylvania.

No Cinnamon, this race will be called pretty early. He'll lose Florida. Not by much, but he'll lose it. After that, he's done. He'd have to pull off an upset in Michigan and Pennsylvania, something like that. Not gonna happen.

Just curious, what will you do when HRC becomes POTUS? I'm not exactly happy about it myself, but what will your narrative be then? Let me guess, it was rigged?

I am excited for the day after tomorrow.

Because I assume that Cinnamon Julie Troll will be back on her meds.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on November 08, 2016, 07:27:03 AM
It is really quite simple.  At the too soon to tell moment we have fragmentation.  This election will come down to who garners the most enthusiasm and like howard dean and Barack Obama right now only sanders is lighting any fires.  Contrasting and most interesting is the lack of enthusiasm on Clintons side.  As an independent  I can tell you  I don't like the Bush/Clinton option.  Clintons ethics are damaging and Bush's connection to iraq is problematic.  Don't know how other independents feel but the "inevitability" moniker creates a sour choice to most of the independents I know.

Ask yourself this? If both pubs and dems are divided down the middle do you really think enthusiasm will be there for two families that have been creeping around the wings of the Oval Office since the 90's???

Also, I think the pulse of the electorate is still charging toward something newer and different--we have obama to thank for that.



Added......donald trump is the enthusiasm candidate and the momentum has peaked for him today....

So missa Hillary dupes..

Enthusiasm is a biatch for democrats this year.

Brace ypurselves 8)
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on November 08, 2016, 09:56:21 PM
Pop, pop, pop!

Aye think the silent majority has spoken.


Change, enthusiasm....like I was saying.


And the FBI criminal investigation has nothing to do with it.

I think our nation just baitch slapped missa hilliary and her posse.

Good riddance tyrannous clinton nixon rex.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on November 08, 2016, 09:57:37 PM
The female rough beast will not slouch her way toward bethlehem to be born.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Phidippides on November 09, 2016, 01:36:59 AM
Wow.

Congratulations cinsyn, everyone else here stands corrected, you were right all along.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Phidippides on November 09, 2016, 01:42:49 AM
Too bad he's behind in Michigan, Florida, and Pennsylvania.

But he won all three.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Phidippides on November 09, 2016, 01:44:46 AM
No Cinnamon, this race will be called pretty early. He'll lose Florida. Not by much, but he'll lose it. After that, he's done. He'd have to pull off an upset in Michigan and Pennsylvania, something like that. Not gonna happen.

Just curious, what will you do when HRC becomes POTUS? I'm not exactly happy about it myself, but what will your narrative be then? Let me guess, it was rigged?

Uh huh.

Just curious, what will you do when DJT becomes POTUS?
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Phidippides on November 09, 2016, 01:46:01 AM
Too bad he's behind in Michigan, Florida, and Pennsylvania.

No Cinnamon, this race will be called pretty early. He'll lose Florida. Not by much, but he'll lose it. After that, he's done. He'd have to pull off an upset in Michigan and Pennsylvania, something like that. Not gonna happen.

Just curious, what will you do when HRC becomes POTUS? I'm not exactly happy about it myself, but what will your narrative be then? Let me guess, it was rigged?

I am excited for the day after tomorrow.

Because I assume that Cinnamon Julie Troll will be back on her meds.

Still excited?
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on November 09, 2016, 06:02:43 AM

The silent majority has spoken....now take a seat!

"The silent majority are finished with the two corrupt parties--

The silent majority want actual change--NO politician--someone else because politicians screw them over.

The silent majority are sick if WAR!!!

The silent majority want JOBS and no more selling us out over seas...

The silent majority HATE political correctness----that is a big one!!!!!
Nate silver does not get this---and it CANNOT be measured.

The silent majority DO NOT vote in every election.

The LIES of the corporate media about a democratic party that speaks to them-- they call it the "new" silent majority is a fuchng bag full of shite and it doesn't add up--- its a con to get more Clinton supporters on board who are unenthused about her---- Clinton fatigue.

The silent majority dont care how you fix the problem....they just want it fixed-- they don't care about policy!!!!!

The silent majority dont like liars who have been caught repeatedly and they can smell corruption because they are thoughtful and not stupid and smell the Clinton con...

The silent majority are from many walks of life and have different ethnic backgrounds....thats one that CNN doesn't want you to know about.

The silent majority are sick and tired of being sold out and are above all

 Fatigued by the BULLSHITE


Lesson over, class"
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on November 09, 2016, 06:05:25 AM
Wow.

Congratulations cinsyn, everyone else here stands corrected, you were right all along.

Thank you.....
You have to read many periodicals, understand human behavior, and block out the noise.

The biggest problem with tho election was the "loki" propaganda media.

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on November 10, 2016, 10:09:30 PM
Congratulations! Well done!

In order to let an otherwise fairly well functioning government know that you're not entirely pleased with the service you're getting, we all get to die in a nuclear holocaust!

Yay!

Petulant children. So determined to stomp your feet and let mommy and daddy know that you're upset, you miss the anvil that's about to fall on your head. So, so stupid.

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on November 11, 2016, 07:27:55 AM
Congratulations! Well done!

In order to let an otherwise fairly well functioning government know that you're not entirely pleased with the service you're getting, we all get to die in a nuclear holocaust!

Yay!

Petulant children. So determined to stomp your feet and let mommy and daddy know that you're upset, you miss the anvil that's about to fall on your head. So, so stupid.

You don't understand politics, obviously.

You truly were a Clinton supporter, she is a career politician who during her long career did not do anything substantial enough to change a political system which has not truly helped people, over the entire course of her career.

Not petulant children, stomping our feet.

But disappointed adults who slammed the gauntlet down upon wasteful, empty promises from the federal government over the course of more than 30 years.....and voted out the ESTABLISHMENT POLICY....

Because it has not helped us adult voters.

...so Hillary lovers stop crying and get to work helping out president elect trump--like Obama did.

Hillary Clinton gets what she deserves...

She should disappear from political life and focus in her family and grandchild...

After all, "it takes a family"---not a village.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Phidippides on November 12, 2016, 01:44:09 AM
Congratulations! Well done!

In order to let an otherwise fairly well functioning government know that you're not entirely pleased with the service you're getting, we all get to die in a nuclear holocaust!

Yay!

Petulant children. So determined to stomp your feet and let mommy and daddy know that you're upset, you miss the anvil that's about to fall on your head. So, so stupid.

At least have the decency to admit you were dead wrong about the election's outcome. The ridiculously biased media fooled just about everyone, myself included, and I'm president of College Republicans at my school.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Phidippides on November 12, 2016, 01:48:24 AM
Just checked, Clinton is now ahead in Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Florida. She's also ahead in Michigan and Wisconsin by even bigger margins.

Give me one piece of evidence to prove me wrong. One. Not your opinion, but actual evidence. My god, I hope I get to go up against you in court someday. Easiest win of my career.

Or not.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on November 14, 2016, 12:06:12 PM
Too bad he's behind in Michigan, Florida, and Pennsylvania.

No Cinnamon, this race will be called pretty early. He'll lose Florida. Not by much, but he'll lose it. After that, he's done. He'd have to pull off an upset in Michigan and Pennsylvania, something like that. Not gonna happen.

Just curious, what will you do when HRC becomes POTUS? I'm not exactly happy about it myself, but what will your narrative be then? Let me guess, it was rigged?

I am excited for the day after tomorrow.

Because I assume that Cinnamon Julie Troll will be back on her meds.

Still excited?

I'll be excited, but only to the extent that Cinnamon Troll stops posting. I haven't made any substantive comments about this election since July (when I wrote that I was worried, except for Cinnamon Troll's confidence). Having followed the 538 models, I was seriously concerned about the actual outcome that we saw- a popular vote win for Clinton, but an electoral college loss.

Unfortunately, being (somewhat) plugged in to the local political establishment locally, I saw some early warning signs the day of, and I knew he had likely won by 7:30pm EST. I am still in a little shock- not so much because I didn't see it coming, but because I lack the imagination to believe that many Americans would vote for Trump, despite the fact that I knew they were doing so.

So I balance on that knife's edge- the pessimism that Americans elected our first internet troll, who ran on a lark and has no idea what to do, versus the optimism that democracy is the belief that people deserve what they vote for- good and hard.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on November 14, 2016, 03:55:26 PM
....from a periodical....but it sums up much of what I have been writing...except for the influence of the FBI investigation and the emphasis on Real CHANGE...not Obama change.

...and the fact that the Catholics, Reagan democrats, and WOMEN rejecting Clinton as an enabler for her husband..

Essentially-- how I phrased and explained the silent majority.



"But mostly, it was a matter of Clinton fatigue, being weary of the same set of folks in power since 1992 who represent everything we distrust about the ruling elite, including government, the media, and even Hollywood celebrities (for me personally, the repudiation of the latter two were the sweetest of all the victory spoils)."
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on November 14, 2016, 04:09:11 PM
Too bad he's behind in Michigan, Florida, and Pennsylvania.

No Cinnamon, this race will be called pretty early. He'll lose Florida. Not by much, but he'll lose it. After that, he's done. He'd have to pull off an upset in Michigan and Pennsylvania, something like that. Not gonna happen.

Just curious, what will you do when HRC becomes POTUS? I'm not exactly happy about it myself, but what will your narrative be then? Let me guess, it was rigged?

I am excited for the day after tomorrow.

Because I assume that Cinnamon Julie Troll will be back on her meds.

Still excited?

I'll be excited, but only to the extent that Cinnamon Troll stops posting. I haven't made any substantive comments about this election since July (when I wrote that I was worried, except for Cinnamon Troll's confidence). Having followed the 538 models, I was seriously concerned about the actual outcome that we saw- a popular vote win for Clinton, but an electoral college loss.

Unfortunately, being (somewhat) plugged in to the local political establishment locally, I saw some early warning signs the day of, and I knew he had likely won by 7:30pm EST. I am still in a little shock- not so much because I didn't see it coming, but because I lack the imagination to believe that many Americans would vote for Trump, despite the fact that I knew they were doing so.

So I balance on that knife's edge- the pessimism that Americans elected our first internet troll, who ran on a lark and has no idea what to do, versus the optimism that democracy is the belief that people deserve what they vote for- good and hard.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on November 14, 2016, 04:38:14 PM
Too bad he's behind in Michigan, Florida, and Pennsylvania.

No Cinnamon, this race will be called pretty early. He'll lose Florida. Not by much, but he'll lose it. After that, he's done. He'd have to pull off an upset in Michigan and Pennsylvania, something like that. Not gonna happen.

Just curious, what will you do when HRC becomes POTUS? I'm not exactly happy about it myself, but what will your narrative be then? Let me guess, it was rigged?

I am excited for the day after tomorrow.

Because I assume that Cinnamon Julie Troll will be back on her meds.

Still excited?

I'll be excited, but only to the extent that Cinnamon Troll stops posting. I haven't made any substantive comments about this election since July (when I wrote that I was worried, except for Cinnamon Troll's confidence). Having followed the 538 models, I was seriously concerned about the actual outcome that we saw- a popular vote win for Clinton, but an electoral college loss.

Unfortunately, being (somewhat) plugged in to the local political establishment locally, I saw some early warning signs the day of, and I knew he had likely won by 7:30pm EST. I am still in a little shock- not so much because I didn't see it coming, but because I lack the imagination to believe that many Americans would vote for Trump, despite the fact that I knew they were doing so.

So I balance on that knife's edge- the pessimism that Americans elected our first internet troll, who ran on a lark and has no idea what to do, versus the optimism that democracy is the belief that people deserve what they vote for- good and hard.

You were worried I July? Is that when you finally understood the gravity of an FBI investigation? 
And you finally learned what a Reagan Democrat was? Or that the silent majority are regular people from all cultures and backgrounds who are fed up with the federal government?

I think you learned your lesson the hard way at 730pm on election day.

Hey, buddy....re read what I wrote and tell me how I was wrong again.

Bernie sanders would have won this election....so suck on Hilliary shite...

Loki, my little troll, next time you should use my method...
I predicted that Hillary Clinton would not be nominated and if she was, she would not be elected president and the probability of her not getting the nomination would be like a Nixon effect....benghazi and her secret emails and basement server with top secret info would slowly rub her out of politics...and it did. I updated her chance of losing after the DNC fixed the primary for her...the posterior probability that many Bernie supporters would vote third party, write in or stay home greatly affected my original hypothesis--to punch home votes Clinton was about to lose..

So, the eroding effect of the FBI investigation was a strong virus like probable compounded by the probable of disenfranchised Bernie supporters..

Then we have the objective inference of the silent majority vote and my subjective inference of historical knowledge regarding---Nixon, Reagan, Perot, Obama and sanders....we shall call them rolling probabilities.

Lastly we have the data of posterior probabilities regarding location of particular voters (Erie, PA)--silent majority, plus Reagan Democrats or catholics--went for trump.

Based on these adjustments to my hypothesis that Clinton would end up like Nixon is what made my popcorn so delicious and enjoyable..

I was off by my prediction regarding the primary...but the posterior probability that the DNC was actively sabotaging Bernie was truly an unknown for me.

The FBI and Clinton herself lost her with the voters of her own party in key places as well as all over...ultimately those two caveats lost her the election.

And loki, you foolish little troll--admitting you were wrong is the first step to "excited" recovery.

My hypothesis was that Clinton wasn't going to be president ultimately was correct and if you re read what i wrote...

You do stand corrected..

I call my pop pop pop...prediction beysian/subjective/cinsyn probability.

It was the correct model to follow regarding this election.

I hope you learned something other than aye was right and you were wrong.  8)
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on November 14, 2016, 04:40:53 PM
Mostly, loki....you wrote it yourself...

You lack imagination and i do NOT....my subjectivity helped me call this puppy.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: loki13 on November 15, 2016, 06:55:04 AM

My hypothesis was that Clinton wasn't going to be president ultimately was correct and if you re read what i wrote...

Your "hypothesis" changed so many times that it's not even funny. The reason you're a troll, and people stopped discussing any serious matters with you more than a half a year ago, is because you kept spouting out nonsensical information and refused to listen even when your multiple incorrect predictions were "incorrect." Well, that and the fact that you've previously trolled here before under a different name.

But saying that X candidate will lose, in a two-party system, is similar to saying a year ahead that "The NFC will lose the Superbowl." You have a decent chance of being correct, regardless of the reason. As you would know if you bothered to look at facts, a replacement-level GOP politician given the current underlying fundamentals following a two-term incumbent would have out-performed Trump. Trump did not "energize" people- he underperformed both Romney and McCain (he received fewer total votes even as the population has increased). Clinton already has won the "silent majority" of votes, and as votes continue to be counted in California, New York, and Washington, her popular vote total will increase - and come close to Obama's 2012 results.

The issue isn't at all what you are (and some pundits) are making it; instead, it's a combination of a misallocation of voters (urban, coastal) for the Democrats, and a misallocation of resources from the Clinton campaign. Millions of wasted votes in California and New York (to list two), Georgia and Texas becoming a lot bluer (but not nearly close enough), and Trump using the electoral college's structural advantage. All the time spent expanding the map and attempting to turn Florida and North Carolina, while no time was spent defending the Midwest, where Trump eked out the win. C'est la vie.

But for what it's worth- there is no such thing as a "Reagan Democrat" anymore. We call those Republicans, now. There are many lessons that can be drawn from this campaign, but they will all be lost on you. Now that the election is over, go away. Given your track record, I won't waste any more time engaged explaining things to you. This post is for the two or three other people that still look into this thread.

Hopefully, once you are doing whatever it is you do (assumedly, collecting your SSDI benefits), people will go back to posting on law-related issues.

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on November 15, 2016, 08:42:39 AM
Oh loki, it is you that are the troll in my thread....you don't see it
Waste if time explaining that to you.
Check the facts...eg who is the op?

Reagan democrats are Catholics who mostly vote democratic but in pa for example they did not....ypu dont see it.
Check the facts.

I am not in shock because I called Clintons demise from the get go.

The FBI criminal investigation and Clinton herself lying and evading I'd what cost her votes ALL over...particularly on Michigan...
Check the facts.
..

You, loki, stand corrected.
You were wrong and I was right about states Bernie would win and the states Clinton would lose..

And I was most right and you denied over and over and over again that the FBI IS conducting a criminal investigation..

Hey, your a sore loser.....go re read the record here, you troll....you hilliary duper.


 8)
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on November 15, 2016, 01:13:43 PM
Wow.

Congratulations cinsyn, everyone else here stands corrected, you were right all along.

Thank you PD!

Why didn't Maintain and Loki admit they were YUGE Clinton supporters when they started discussing (like Maintain) and trolling (like Loki) on this thread.

How come they cant admit they were wrong about the FBI criminal investigation nor the fact that Clinton was never going to beat Rubio or Trump for that matter?

My hypothesis is that they are koolaide drinking Democrats who by into their own manure smell...
They wouldn't even give Bernie a chance.

Typically, the koolaide drinkers are in the deep dive and I bet half of them STILL cant believe that hiliary lost let alone that as soon as the FBI started the criminal investigation that the party was over....

Some like Maintain and Loki wake up thinking they are dreaming with this Trump presidency... if I had to bet on probables with rolling variables in my model. 8)

Loki and maintain will not admit that I predicted trumps win in Ohio, Florida, Michigan and Iowa....why is that PD?

Loki swore up and down that there was NO FBI criminal investigation into clinton....i think he still does....

It's denial right?
Or are they kooolaode drinkers.

Hell, I even pointed out most of the states Bernie was going to win.

Any thoughts?
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on November 15, 2016, 01:40:17 PM
Please with your bull$#%t.

You guessed tails on a coin flip and got it right. You're not Nostradamus.

But yes, he won (although Clinton actually got more votes). I believed the polls and the polls were wrong.

And now we are stuck with a petulant know-nothing, a thin skinned ignoramus. Was Clinton a good choice? No, she was a train wreck. But Trump presents a risk (especially in terms of foreign policy) that is difficult to quantify.

I can understand being furious at the corruption, at the graft, at the nepotism, etc. I can't understand thinking that Trump is the answer. This was a monumentally bad choice.

And, ironically, Trump's election probably spells demographic doom for the Republican party. Between deporting people's parents and appointing justices who will overturn Roe, Republicans will lose millions of votes from women and Latinos.

Trump got 60 million votes (roughly the same as Romney), and Clinton will end up with something like 62 million. Obama got 65 million, and that is the real story here. Clinton was so compromised and unlikable that people simply didn't turn out.

Imagine Trump having to run against someone like Cory Booker in four years after driving away even greater numbers of voters.     
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on November 15, 2016, 08:58:01 PM
Please with your bull$#%t.

You guessed tails on a coin flip and got it right. You're not Nostradamus.

But yes, he won (although Clinton actually got more votes). I believed the polls and the polls were wrong.

And now we are stuck with a petulant know-nothing, a thin skinned ignoramus. Was Clinton a good choice? No, she was a train wreck. But Trump presents a risk (especially in terms of foreign policy) that is difficult to quantify.

I can understand being furious at the corruption, at the graft, at the nepotism, etc. I can't understand thinking that Trump is the answer. This was a monumentally bad choice.

And, ironically, Trump's election probably spells demographic doom for the Republican party. Between deporting people's parents and appointing justices who will overturn Roe, Republicans will lose millions of votes from women and Latinos.

Trump got 60 million votes (roughly the same as Romney), and Clinton will end up with something like 62 million. Obama got 65 million, and that is the real story here. Clinton was so compromised and unlikable that people simply didn't turn out.

Imagine Trump having to run against someone like Cory Booker in four years after driving away even greater numbers of voters.   

You just proved my above point and it is obvious that you dram
Nk the kool aide...
The Democratic Party is in shambles. The republicans just about control both branches plus the presidency...however the Republican Party is altered now...I'm excited to see jow it plays out and see what they will do.

In either case trump blew up both parties....
It was the season of disestablishmentarianism and change.

Clinton was a risk Trump represents visceral change..

Hey Maintain, you get exactly what you deserve for supporting that disingenuous congenial two faced ultra rich Scranton pa hack failure named hillary.

Bernie would be president now if you and many like you had not drunk the kool aide....think about it, I know you will.

But you still won't get that people didn't want the same shite....they want radical change.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on November 15, 2016, 09:02:35 PM
...sorry maintain, how could you support that disingenuous, two faced congenial liar, unaccomplished fake, phony, crooked, conniving, black people voice pandering, provincial hack, a-hole named hillary?
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on November 15, 2016, 09:03:30 PM
76864
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on November 15, 2016, 09:10:47 PM
Here is where you are politically naive, Maintain....

Our fuching federal government is one big bloated grift....it is corrupt and hillary clinton represents the top of the grift corrupt cesspool funds masquerading as charity foundations...

Trump is the answer to that because he is irreverent and doesn't take shite from anyone,... He is a loose cannon in many ways but he thought going into iraq and nation building was a stupid idea so I think he'll use more discretion than the media/polls. Er polls/media made him out to be..

We all know that clinton would be the riskier candidate in charge of our military and nuclear weapons because of her bad judgements with regard to Libya and iraq. Plus her super violent tantrums that she throws...her temperament is off center.

Not worried about trump and going to war I was worried about clinton who has a warmonger track record.

Sorry, just the facts....
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on November 15, 2016, 10:20:51 PM
You fool.

Trump has indeed blown up the Republican party, and he will try to remake it in his own image. Anyone who opposes him will be destroyed by Breitbart and the rest of the alt-right media, and primaried out of existence. They will be replaced with loyalists who look to the man more than any policy.

Even better, there will be no Supreme Court to check his excesses, as he will likely replace at least two justices with his handpicked cronies.

And when he fails? No problem, plenty of scapegoats to blame. Mexicans, Muslims, Republicans. Whatever.

Listen Julie, I understand that you're ignorant and uneducated but it is pretty amazing to think that you went from a Democratic Socialist to an authoritarian mega-capitalist without even realizing the irony.

Oh, but I forgot! She had bad emails. Yes, a police state run by a Putinista will be much better.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on November 16, 2016, 04:49:53 PM
I have Julie blocked, but isn't remaking a party from a party of the people into their own image, the EXACT thing Hitler did with a party that started out basically just being a combination of Bernie Sanders and the NRA????????
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on November 17, 2016, 05:00:48 AM
You fool.

Trump has indeed blown up the Republican party, and he will try to remake it in his own image. Anyone who opposes him will be destroyed by Breitbart and the rest of the alt-right media, and primaried out of existence. They will be replaced with loyalists who look to the man more than any policy.

Even better, there will be no Supreme Court to check his excesses, as he will likely replace at least two justices with his handpicked cronies.

And when he fails? No problem, plenty of scapegoats to blame. Mexicans, Muslims, Republicans. Whatever.

Listen Julie, I understand that you're ignorant and uneducated but it is pretty amazing to think that you went from a Democratic Socialist to an authoritarian mega-capitalist without even realizing the irony.

Oh, but I forgot! She had bad emails. Yes, a police state run by a Putinista will be much better.

You didn't reslly grasp anything I wrote. If you think for a moment that the FBI criminal investigations and hillarys own dangerous corruptions were not a problem for us experienced voters and solid not contribute greatly to her ultimate demise...as I've been writing about all along then you get everything you deserve and you are tragically naive.

You drank the koolaide, Maintain.

Our two party system needs change.

You drink the koolaide so much you have created a boogeyman for yourself.

Trump is your president and because you didn't support Bernie sanders....you helped to elect trump.

Take a bow.  And you are an idiot for thinking I'm a former poster...i made you think that because I'm clever. 
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on November 17, 2016, 07:40:04 AM
People who are koolaide drinkers kept electing the same candidates without vetting the consequences.

I think that the Clintons, Hillary, in particular are as dangerous as the fascist regimes of Italy and Germany without all the uniforms.

The fascist corruption is a lable....but whar do we call it when
Donna Brazille gets the answers to CNN debate questions and gives them to the chancellor?
What do you call it when Debbie Wasserman Shultz rigs her entire "Democratic Nationalist Party" to suppress, delegitimatize, and destroy a popular grass roots candidate at the behest of the chancellors private Clinton brown shirted tenticled army?

What of David brick? And Sidney blumenthaL? And Goebels?

Since 1992 the dark money...uber ties with the banking cartel....the Clinton fascist movement have governers like Terry Mac doing deals and shuffling money begin the scenes for bill and Hillary?

What about all the war this fascist organization pussed in Iraq and Libya?

Guess what? Trump is change of all that corruptions.

Who Are the superpacs and newspapers and bankers who support Trump?

List them please, only then Maintain do you begin to understand the trouble with the Hillary Clinton warmongering party.😉
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on November 17, 2016, 07:45:48 AM
Sorry for auto correct, but I think you might begin to get it, maintain...

David Brock is a propagandist.
Sidney Blumenthal was trying to arrange business deals during the collapse of Libya.

How do they might fit into my idea of corruption? Not yours, mine?

They are not trying to help voters...they are trying to help the Clinton national socialist party
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on November 17, 2016, 08:38:22 AM
Temperment:  Hillary Clinton did not even show her face to her own supporters on her election night?

Why?

She was having a mental meltdown and became angry for hours...throwing things at people.  She was maybe in a rage?

I worry about this kind of unhinged person with the nuclear codes.

Good thing this unstable person was not elected.

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on November 17, 2016, 01:35:16 PM
So, for the koolaide drinking democrats who dont think I was correct when i told them earlier in the thread that their party was severely fractured...more so than the Republican party they sighed a collective.....Meh.

Now, with the autopsy of the democratic party on the table do these same koolaide drinkers know they are drinking koolaide?

Here is the test.....do you not realize that the house, the senate, and the presidency is in the hands of the Republicans?

Or do you think that the election numbers will keep coming in, like the poll numbers and justify their arrogance?

I told you what was coming and people like Loki and Maintain keep whistling past the graveyard.

I warned ya, I told ya about fracture, independents, disestablishmentarianism, and enthusiasm...

That is what the 2016 elections were about.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on November 17, 2016, 01:41:34 PM

Listen Julie, I understand that you're ignorant and uneducated but it is pretty amazing to think that you went from a Democratic Socialist to an authoritarian mega-capitalist without even realizing the irony.



I'm not Julie, he loved Hillary.
If you read what I actually wrote you would know i am an independent libertarian who hopes one day for term limits..

I supported Bernie and Jill....when I found out how bad Clinton regime was I switched to trump-- who is neither a Democrat, nor a Republican.

I wrote how strange but not ironic it was.

Just because Bernie is a Dem socialist doesn't mean all his supporters are.

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on November 17, 2016, 08:19:02 PM

My hypothesis was that Clinton wasn't going to be president ultimately was correct and if you re read what i wrote...

Your "hypothesis" changed so many times.... Given your track record, I won't waste any more time engaged explaining things to you. This post is for the two or three other people that still look into this thread.



Loki, this is why you are a proven discredited poster here.

On Tuesday Nov 15 there were 76954 "looks" or checks into this thread on Thursday Nov 17 look at how many there are????????

You moron, there are not one or two people who look at this thread----you are sloppy with your facts--a bit of a pretentious poser---

Cant you even do simple addition????????

There have been about 900 views of this thread.  So unless you know that the 897 are you and then me and one or two other people who check the thread you are really off with your hypothetical model...

Lmfao--laughing my fuching ass off!!!!!

My hypothesis was correct--Clinton was going to beat NOBODY to win the presidency....and she lost to the easiest one to beat....
Right?
Sums up the la times Washington post foolhardy narrative.

You stupid troll--go away and sulk.

You were wrong.

Especially about the criminal FBI investigation....which still goes on.....clinton regime has fallen.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on November 17, 2016, 08:22:16 PM
Loki, more than 900 people check into this thread every 3 days or so.....

Not two or three. 

Get it?

Probably not
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on November 18, 2016, 04:24:39 PM
Hey loki....
78100
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on November 21, 2016, 04:46:25 PM
Ding dong the witch is dead....lmao!

Not exactly, but Hillary will be disappearing into history the way Nixon did....no job and no prospects...

At least Hillary can bake cookies and realize that some of our best female role models and trailblazing feminists are wives and mothers.

She will still have the FBI investigating her corrupt dealings while she tenured at the state department, of course. But essentially so many Americans are happy to be rid if her.

So happy!
And the fools who I proved wrong on this board....likely we will never hear from them again...i mean they lost and lost it big time....

Ipening up a huge bag of popcorn...
Blue corn and lots of butter.

Pop pop pop...hillarys washed up like tricky male private part Nixon a slow demise.

Px out!!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on November 22, 2016, 07:36:48 AM
The FBI has an intensive investigation ongoing into the Clinton Foundation.

....so, if she were elected she would be like Nixon on a sinking ship...
For Nixon his secret tapes were earthed up after the Watergate fiasco...

For Hillary her secret server was earthed up after the Benghazi fiasco.

....now, since she was not elected the FBI investigation into the Clintons and their corrupt scam she is Nixon 2.0
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on November 23, 2016, 04:24:10 PM
Hillary Rodham and the fickled fuching finger of fate

Once upon a time I pondered ms. Rodham as president.  She is a rube from Scranton Pennsylvania suburbs.  This was back after I watched the Clintons attempt to make a grand entrance out of a double door Victorian to speak to a throng of voters.  The door would not open-as they thought they could orchestrate this "bit" for "the electorate"......failure....it took them 10 minutes to get the door open....many political jokes and poking fun while we waited....

To be fair....i couldn't give a pigs ass who or what they represented.

But I watched with some suspicion....1992

Bill Clinton lied about having an affair...but Hillary Rodham truly enabled bill because she had a long plan.....one which in which she sabotaged herself, in the end and began an evening of destructive behavior and explosive temper so deep that she could NOT face her supporters.

Hillary spoke for hours to the American people in a pink dress----it was bullshite enabling of her husbands dalliances...all b.s.

Hillary Rodham claimed to have arrived in Bosnia during the late nineties under a pelting of snipers and lead....

Warner Wolf said, "lets go to the videotape"....hillary and Chelsea arrived to flowers and smiles...they waved....

That day, I changed my opinion of her and realized--since I am an expert in human behavior and a human lie detector--Hillary Clinton I a congenital liar.

Hillary Rodham wanted to make Libya her success story....

She wanted, as her slime weasel, "Alfred Rosenberg" type--Sidney Blumenthal---- to make a grand entrance to a fawning press conference where she could say....

I have rid us of kadhafi and have a successful standing embassy in Benghazi....and our efforts to build a democracy are underway....

Benghazi is the beginning of the end for Rodham....utter, 3am failure...while she failed miserably to recognize that ambassador Stevens needed help....so under prepared for a genuine guerrilla warzone.

No genuine remorse from Rodham...why were we investigating her actions when she had orchestrated a "paper Mache" "arb" as she likes to use Scranton Pennsylvania accent when not using a "black voice imitation" when speaking to black southern churches.....please, such disingenuous pandering to black people...sucks to be fooled....and many folks have been duped by the shoot and jive and whatever.

What difference does it make? And why are we trying to look backwards?

Because Hillary--- you fuches up.  You ruined peoples lives...and most "sinful" and grievous, you lied to dead son's mothers about "getting to the one who made the video"...

That act alone is how grace, karma, kismet returns to roost....

Hillary Rodham Los the election THAT very day she testified...because the press tried to make it seem that she was correct and presidential....but the voters were not to be fooled, again by Rodham.

Like Watergate, like Waterloo....Benghazi and Hillary Rodhams actions or lack of action there coat her the election...

You can almost trace Benghazi and its timeline to the election over the timeline of Watergate....

Hillary Rodham and Richard Nixon have a great deal in common.

Finally, its over for Rodham....she will now bake cookies....and maybe go to jail...unless Obama pardons her....

Lets see if the parallels continue...

Bye, Hillary.  Good riddance.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on November 23, 2016, 04:38:51 PM
...89174....people need to read the above post....

I know many people view this particular thread....

I am happy, many of you know I have been on point with this election from the beginning...

I hope someone who knows Rodham personally tells her to read the last post.

I've met Clinton personally and can tell you, in one word, how most people who know her, think of her when they remove all their personal bias.

Hillary Rodham is "disingenuous".

I dismissed her approach to me and said, "You're right, now why don't you yourself go into the kitchen and light a fire under somebody's ass and get this thing started?  I'm an invited guest."
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on November 25, 2016, 06:58:41 AM
79694
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on December 07, 2016, 03:50:06 PM
Omg? Trump showing first respects to Taiwan after they reach out to congratulate him instead of China.  Chinese currency value was already on upturn because of their economic slowdown but hopefully this trump guy will start to get them to bring it up to speed and end their artificial manipulation.

No more nation building and overthrowing dictators like that idiot clinton did.

Funny, the hillaristas have been thwarted but some of the sore losers will relax with their new president.

I'm happy.  Many people I know are glad to be rid of her corrupt pretense on the world stage
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on December 15, 2016, 05:48:01 AM
82407...so loki, the troll can follow along.

Such an amazing morning--with Hillary Rodham vanquished from holding any political power....ah, lets all sigh a collective sound of relief....feels great doesn't it?

It is amazing how Mike Morell the former attempted Benghazi cover up CIA assistantdirector continues  to speak out in the press... Will somebody put a muzzle on this clown....in Pennsylvania, this supposed politically neutral hack had so many commercials on the radio it literally drove people to vote for Trump.

Anyone who thought it was disgusting, mean, base, tasteless and classless for Hillary Rodaham Clinton to stand over slain Benghazi victims coffins--- blame a video for their deaths and say to the mothers and fathers of the deceased that we are going to get the ones who made the video....knows and was constantly reminded that Mike Morel was an accomplice to this debacle....
Reminded every day. On many radio stations we heard his voice and it saddened and angered many of us.

I was going to vote for Jill Stein..but switched to trump.

It hammered home just how terrible Clinton was and drove us to the poles for Trump.

Benghazi lies and cover up is ultimately the undoing of the democratic party--- lets face it- they are fuched.....more than fractured now than even I thought.

Part of the reason as well is enthusiasm...she had none. Trump had great enthusiasm.

Enthusiasm will win elections!  Like I wrote many pages back.

Ultimately...and Clinton supporters like MAINTAINS gave her impeding loss away....when a person is mousy and disgusted and has to "hold" their "nose" to vote----you have a problem.

So, I'm enjoying some popcorn today...the pop pop pop is now munch munch munch...

But the expensive Hillary Clinton "noise machine" is taking a while to die....lol....dont worry, it will.

The FBI will continue to investigate the Clinton Foundation....but those foreign donations are tellingly drying up....

So, rest easy today....its hilarys sound and fury....signifying nothing.

Lmfao!!!

Px out
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on December 20, 2016, 05:18:09 AM
I wrote a few months back how the Republican party had healthy dissent within its ranks...but the democratic corporate party was fracturing apart and some , now discredited posters failed to see this and even puerily tried to argue against my assessment.  They were proven wrong....thenelection of trump sealed the deal.

Most problematic is the democrats....since after jimmy carter have tried to paint themselves as a party of discriminating specifics and identity---wrong.  Because in mere attempts to say that one "type" of person is who we are and what we represent they look "entitled" and others who are not their "type" have been oppressors....in a nut shell that is the problem.

Today democrats say, and its a general formula...no matter who the candidate is running, if they are a Republican...they are sexist, racist, religionist, ....to many people just by mentioning this it makes them think that the person or group making the claim is actually the one who is racist, sexist, religionist.

The democratic party, who had no diversity in its selection of presidential candidates appears to be the true party of slavery, bigotry, racism, sexism,..and historically it has been this way.

Today, nothing has changed..the Republican party has been more inclusive and accepting of people from different backgrounds...quietly building power and the democratic party seems to only want certain groups in its ranks...

The biggest example is that this year the democratic party didn't even want the vote from Mixed European Americans. And they tried to get African Americans to come out and vote...but they offered nothing to them....maybe more of the same...

The Clinton campaign was racist in its decision to not reach out to  mixed European Americans and it had been exposed and backfired..

Racism has fractured the democratic party and continuing to suggest that "some" people are "entitled" to things over the rest of the electorate will continue to be the donkeys undoing.

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on December 20, 2016, 05:31:36 AM
The democratic party is the party saying, "who farted?"

Much of the rest of us think "why are you talking about this?"

The truth underlying this is the known, "He who smelled it and yelled it dealt it"

The Democrat have to stop focusing on and drawing attention to the own gastrointestinal problems...

In other words...abandon the shite talk....because it only makes you look like white.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on December 20, 2016, 03:21:26 PM
Trump, nailed it....the Clintons for all their smarts could not figure out to be inclusive with regard to the rust belt, and the mixed European Americans who live there...they voted for bill...they voted for barak...

But this time around they caved to the Clinton calling card....pandering.

And in pandering they excluded mixed European from their agenda...

They used the word "fire wall" and that assumes too much....

Identity politics pointing to "the Hispanic vote" or the "black vote" is bigoted in its conception...

...if part of the rust belt culture felt left out because they see pandering to another group where a sense of entitlement is present and you start your fire wall to crumbling..

....so bill Clinton looks small and petty in his assessment.

Hillary lost the race all on her own because she is a liar.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on December 26, 2016, 08:41:06 PM
75055...

Racism? Huh? Sexism? nah? Ageism? What?

Nope, pissed off bluecollar workers allllll
Over the country....they voted for barak many of them....but haha..not again, ms. Clintain.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on December 29, 2016, 07:20:45 AM
85438...

Maybe Hillary fans in California will remember that the other 49 states count as well...even Montana.

Live free without Clinton family interference, corruption and deception.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on January 03, 2017, 05:03:26 AM
86576...

Lets see how long the Clinton foundation goes before Law enforcement criminal investigations get multiple mainstream press periodicals to comment more.

This would have coincided with impeachment proceedings.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on January 10, 2017, 07:55:54 AM
...87856

Merril Streep used to have a good ear for acting, alas she is a phony who sold out long ago---her cardboard characters she has portrayed for the past 30 years reflect an actor who doesn't care about depth....just a lazily earned paycheck...

Yes, she has been phoning in performances for so long now I gave up on seeing any of her movies going back to 1990...

The speech where she does not inspire but uses her position in apolitical way--and negative.

I believe she is a sore loser now..

I relish when acting awards and nominations are given to actors other than her.

Merril is in a basket full of deplorables for the acting world.

Streep was born into money and entertainment connections....thats it...her father knew Joseph papp.

Follow the money.

Aside what trump did....streep should get over her over the top outrage and try, "acting"...

Maybe a refresher course in acting 101 down at the actors studio can fix her cardboard character problem....and get some depth back into her acting.

Mike Nichols helped turn it around for all pacino..

Maybe merril will retain some of her faded talent.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on January 16, 2017, 07:59:47 AM
88547...

Peter Kadzik.....andrew McCabe....terry McAuliffe....

Obama appointed Inspector Generals have really been helpful to force the corrupt Clinton Family to their knees.

Cant wait to see Hillary at trumps inauguration....i bet she coughs a lot.....especially she shown on camera...

We will be counting how many times they put her on the screen.

Pop pop pop goes the Democrat party.....
Amazingly enough for all the posters on this boards stupid speculation about the Gop demise...

The GOP run the country now.

Better get something done or....

Vote the bums out!!!!



Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on January 26, 2017, 03:56:25 PM
...89420

Wow! Just Wow!
Patrick Kennedy at the state department just got his ass FIRED!

Good. That's karma Kramer.....he fuched up with missa Clinton in Benghazi then he tried to cover for her crimes.....kar mm a got him!!!

Good riddance....

Looks lil trump means business.

Oh, and it is amazing to reread what I wrote months ago about the fracturing and now SHATTERED democratic party.

Maintain and Loki who have been discredited will not show their faces in this thread again.  Vanquished they are.

I'll repost what I wrote months ago to show how the cookie began to crumble.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: 🍟💵🌲🍥 on January 26, 2017, 10:38:27 PM
...89420

Wow! Just Wow!
Patrick Kennedy at the state department just got his ass FIRED!

Good. That's karma Kramer.....he fuched up with missa Clinton in Benghazi then he tried to cover for her crimes.....kar mm a got him!!!

Good riddance....

Looks lil trump means business.

Oh, and it is amazing to reread what I wrote months ago about the fracturing and now SHATTERED democratic party.

Maintain and Loki who have been discredited will not show their faces in this thread again.  Vanquished they are.

I'll repost what I wrote months ago to show how the cookie began to crumble.
meaning, what? That you are bragging about talking to yourself?
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on January 27, 2017, 05:39:41 AM
...89420

Wow! Just Wow!
Patrick Kennedy at the state department just got his ass FIRED!

Good. That's karma Kramer.....he fuched up with missa Clinton in Benghazi then he tried to cover for her crimes.....kar mm a got him!!!

Good riddance....

Looks lil trump means business.

Oh, and it is amazing to reread what I wrote months ago about the fracturing and now SHATTERED democratic party.

Maintain and Loki who have been discredited will not show their faces in this thread again.  Vanquished they are.

I'll repost what I wrote months ago to show how the cookie began to crumble.
meaning, what? That you are bragging about talking to yourself?

Um, hey dumbass? Where ya been tokenboy? 
Hey how did that "token" theory work out for ya with Hillary? Hahaha!!!

Um this is called "writing" not talking...I know its confusing for windowlickers like yourself.

And if you look at my post you will see that everyday there are people who view this thread....

You know what? You are one of them....so I am writing and you are one of the recipients.

In fact, there are about 100 views everyday....

I posted this last night and 12 hours later 100 views....get it?

Probably not.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on January 30, 2017, 09:51:02 PM
So Hillary is not "for"screening people coming from countries with serious civil unrest and civil war.  She helped create some of those pockets of unrest and war by her own actions....particularly in Syria, and Libya....her support of the war in iraq---which trump thought was a stupid idea....hell she and Obama set up screenings for Iraq and Afghanistan.....
Why was that NO BIG deal?
Because the cnns and Washington post and NY times highlighted it.

Yawn.

...90000

Hillary, your foundation is tanking and corrupt...
Do yourself a favor....bake cookies and continue to Stand by your man.

Lmao

So Hillary takes to twitter for a "me too" to cry out that she is still relevant....

Oh Hillary is so yesterday's news...powerless and pitiful.

But it is fun to watch her squirm watching trump exact executive order after executive order
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on February 02, 2017, 08:40:50 AM
90401...



Hilary, a book?.....tsk tsk....so lazy.
Tv show? Too much work.
Mayor of NYC? Garbage work....and hillarys too too lazy for that.

Bake cookies. Stand by your man Hillary!!!!

Lmao.

Clinton foundation? Not so sound anymore...if ever
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on February 07, 2017, 04:07:56 PM
91003...

So, Hilary is now trying to make some money.....again......probably dead broke....

She is becoming Sarah Palin now and channeling her inner Palin....


Bless her corrupt heart...

We know women power is awesome Sarahillry......Sarah Palin has been trumpeting for female power before Barack got into the oval office.....
But, I betcha she wouldn't stand by her man if he was a serial rapist and abuser of women....nope....shed leave he's ass Hugh n dry!!!!

So much for enabling those who choose to cower and stand by their man!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on February 10, 2017, 09:56:42 PM
91389...

So, some democrats read this....a lot of democrats read this😉

Two democrats who troll this thread....and I've caught than checking it out even if they don't have a rebuttal or it seems....a clue for to trumps win.

The enthusiasm was the biggest factor....trump had it...clinton not so much.....i mentioned that many months ago.....change...real change...not Obama change.

Secondly, Hillary Clinton has been lying as much as her husband over the years and has been busted for it time and time and time again....

This second point most democrats, especially the ones who voted for her are in DENIAL....some democrats.....particularly----Reagan democrats, or (catholic democrats) in Pennsylvania and Ohio and Iowa and Wisconsin and Michigan and working class black, green, gray, blue, red and white democrats throughout the Entire country also did not vote for Clinton.

Independents....another group I mentioned months ago also voted for trump....even progressive libertarians like myself went for trump over warmonger Clinton.

....the FBI criminal investigation into her pay to plays and her breaking laws regarding classified information took her out of the race....her fault.

....her comments about Catholics, her floupflopping and pandering on issues, and of course her "deplorables" comment sealed the deal.

Democrats are out of power and the number one reason most folks who voted against there former party affiliation is the near embracing RACIST...and seriously BIGOTED IDENTiTY politics with which they have aligned themselves....

We are Americans....not blacks whites, mesopoetamians, or spaniards.

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on February 10, 2017, 10:07:55 PM
So,
Russians....nope
Fake news...hahaha....no
Voter fraud---Hillary and jills recount...really?  I thought the democratic party doesn't recognize those who vote early and often and there is no such thing as Santa Claus and voter fraud to the democratic party.
The FBIs two letters in October? Well, my question is didn't Hillary bring the FBI into the election when she operated her surreptitious private computer system?  But not really----that cake was baked when it was discovered that the FBI found her gross negligence but decided not to prosecute.

That's all....hillary lost it because she is a shill....always has been....always will
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on February 13, 2017, 08:13:13 AM
91923..

Democrats need to focus on economic issues---leave "identity politics" or racist politics behind or trump will own another 4years.

Nobody but Hillary Clinton apologists believe in it.

Even an openly homosexual doesn't give a *&^% about who is whom when his family is out of work.

Tell it to the sea!!!!!
You will be out of politics for a long time.

No one cares that the president called Elizabeth Warren Pocahontas....maybe those with a good job care....nobody else.

They should leave  sexism behind them as well......why?

Because when Republican women are attacked it is NOW seen as sexist....even if you are attacking a point of view they have....cuts both ways.

 

We are all affected by the economy....
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on February 14, 2017, 07:57:12 AM
92114

Hillarys first two batches of cookies did not turn out the way she liked.  She got very angry and has become bitter as she vents and rants on twitter....

Hillary....go get some nice eggs some good old brown sugar and try again....because this is your life now.

Hillary, might just be delusional and thinks she is still running for office.

Oh well its a fun train wreck to watch....

As we find out (Nate silver has confirmed) that it truly was a huge silent majority who came out to vote against Hillary Clinton and for radical change...

In the Midwest, for example, it wasn’t just Michigan and Wisconsin that became much redder..... So did Minnesota, Indiana, Missouri, North Dakota and South Dakota,....add PA, Michigan Wisconsin....

Silent majority voted!  Not for Clinton.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on February 16, 2017, 04:27:03 PM
91512...

Thank god Hillary is lazy and prefers getting fake applause for doing nothing as she shows up for 4 Broadway shows....and a no show on the campaign trail in the rust belt....

She lazy....think I was kidding.

No stamina....HA!

...its like Sally Field playing a soap star who goes to the mall to be recognized....

Cancel the fireworks already Hillary. 

You are toast!  Like I said 1 year ago.

.....i am following the slow crash 💥 of the Clinton foundation now!!!!
Such fun
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on February 16, 2017, 04:28:07 PM
Sorry 92513😉
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on February 21, 2017, 06:48:16 AM
92918....


Loki!!!!! I have an article from a periodical for you, my friend.....


So? Any lawyer on this board now think the democratic party isn't morbidly fractured that it is going to take a long long time to repair?

Those like lol and maintenance.....

Understand, I'm sure they do that the Republican party is restructuring.....but seriously IN POWER?

Libertarians are taking over Pennsylvania.


.....then there is this from a periodical.


...Next, let’s debunk my least favorite rumor about Hillary Clinton, that she is some kind of Democratic Party leader who would put the Democratic Party above everything and save us in these trying Trumpian times. Hillary Clinton has run two national primary elections for the presidency. In both, she complained about the negative “attacks” she received, claiming she wanted a primary based on the issues while her spin team (more commonly known as the main stream media) went after the religious beliefs of her enemies (Obama pictured in a turban, obviously trying to play off the nation’s islamophobic tendencies and WikiLeaks proved that the DNC, in coordination with the Clinton camp, questioned whether Bernie Sanders is Jewish or atheist). She called on her supporters (Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand) to come out and question whether Bernie Sanders truly cared about the Sandy Hook shooting victims, over a gun law (Sanders believes that you should not be able to sue a gun manufacturer after a mass shooting, like you can’t sue a car company after a car accident). After the Election, Hillary gave a speech to her donors in NYC and gave a speech for Senators during Sen. Harry Reid’s farewell, she took the time to blame “fake news” for costing her the election. She never made it to Standing Rock (Malia Obama made it to the protests), she didn’t go to the Women’s March (those who say she wasn’t invited, get off your high horse; millions of people took to the streets and none of them had an invite) she didn’t go to the spontaneous airport protests, like Sen. Elizabeth Warren, Rep. John Lewis, and others. She hasn’t aided in the town hall protests, nor has she done anything to aid the regular people after she lost. All she does is send tweets poking at Trump every once in awhile that don’t land as well as she would like because it’s a lot harder to get under someone’s skin after they just beat you. She sulked for a while, then signed a book deal and went back to giving speeches for the rich and powerful. Hillary may stand for the Democrats in Washington and the party elites but she certainly does not stand with us, the people of the Democratic party. This is classic Hillary Clinton: put in the least amount of work for the real people and then take credit and let the Clinton machine’s enormous “spin” team take over and try to shape public opinion. Again, I cannot let this go without reiterating, some of Clinton’s biggest supporters were in the media itself, giving an obvious bias for Clinton.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on February 21, 2017, 06:51:36 AM







Pleas Print.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on February 21, 2017, 07:43:05 AM
...cristy Kenny--fired!
...tom countryman--fired!
...patrick Kennedy---fired!

Great news....they really are gone...

Lets get the business as usual worms out of the state department.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on February 23, 2017, 07:28:45 AM
The fragmentation is within the Democratic Party and "dueling progressive agendas"  and in the Republican Party between civil libertarianism and establishment conservatism.

I essentially agree about the basis of the Democratic split, but I think the Republican split I far more damaging to their overall chances.

The Republican split is at least a three way between establishments (Bush), libertarians (Paul), and religious conservatives (Huckabee, Santorum, etc).

 I would argue that at this point the Republicans are in a real bind, a Catch-22. Candidates can't win the nomination or the general election without the evangelicals stepping up and voting, but they're doomed with independents if they appear too evangelical themselves.

The Republicans have allowed this far right element of the party to wield too much influence for too long, and now it's biting them on the a$$.

Even though I'm a Democrat, I hope they figure it out and find a way to be nationally competitive. I don't want there to be one party rule for the next few decades. Competition is good for political parties, it helps minimize corruption. California is a one party state, and look where it got us.

I think that the fragmentation of the Democratic Party is going to lead to a serious lack of enthusiasm at the polls.  Obama dems, and the national Democratic Party;  establishment dems and Reagan/Bill Clinton dems, and the levels of progressives who support people like e. Warren, b Deblasio and b. Sanders. If someone with a true progressive populist agenda wins the nomination then enthusiasm will be up but I think that if clinton makes it to the primaries and wins the nomination she will face the tsunami horde of the entire right wing of the Republican Party.   Then we will have as we independents like to call the "4 year shot"...it's what the democrats had in 2008 and 2009.   The dems have a strange dynamic this time around with clinton/ reminds me of when the pubs ran bob Dole).  and the pubs have the same dynamic they always have but there are not 2 candidates to watch---there are many candidates to watch.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on February 26, 2017, 06:49:36 AM
I cant wait for hillarys new book.  But only because I want to ser how much time she spends going around the country to publicize it.

I bet she shows up in NYC , Chicago, Los Angeles, san Francisco, and that is about it....maybe just NYC and l.a.

I hope she continues to try to stay relevant.....although its hard when you are a half-baked cookie maker.

Maybe Hillary should go on dancing with the stars....that is the go to spot for "washed up" celebrities.

She should not be turning down job opportunities like dancing with the stars....i would tune in to watch her train wreck on national tv.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on February 26, 2017, 04:18:42 PM
94180...

...dnc should have pushed the mayor through....perez is a shill for clintonwingnut end of party.

And it seems like the end of a party,doesn't it?
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on February 27, 2017, 07:01:15 AM
94330...

Laughing hard at the democrats scripted wooden (commercially publicized) (CNN, MSNBC, Washington post, nee yoek times sponsored..........

Democratic National (Corporate) presidential elections-----because the real Presidential Election was a killjoy for the Clintonixon wingnuts of the party.

Naturally, or artificially----probably the latter Tom Perez won....

As a token----a frequent word associated with the democratic national party going back to it's racist roots and bigoted jim crow laws.....

As a token....they gave Bernie sanders--proxy Ellis a lollipop 🍭 for coming in second.

So, progressives and socialist democrats and some libertarians are now going to focus on local and state elections....because the corporate wing of the party is going into the wastepaper basket--- along with Hillary.

Fyo.the Russian "narrative" of rigging our election is for the delusional--- unless they went into the rust belt and every "Republican district" and assisted with the get out to vote Republican effort---the Russians hd no impact whatsoever...

To think this is a grassroots primer for the Clintonixon wing of the DNC...is to think that by doing NO actual connecting with people you can begin a movement.....hajahajajajajaja hahhahajahajahajjahahaha!!!!!!

Not cheap, but seriously lazy.

Bernie started a grassroots movement.....clinton sabotaged it. But did not get rid of it....

With the Ellis token move.  Droves are done with the party.

Except for Washington dc, new York, Connecticut, Illinois and California....the rest of the country are progressive democrats not corporate democrats.

Great job DNC....let us know when youcome out of the wilderness and

Drop......the money oriented, warmongering, bigoted identity politics.

Until then keep trying to pretend you are the tea party which was and is a successful grassroots movement.

Suck it up.  This stuff hurts to hear.

Only if democrats purge out the vanquish Clinton and her shills from  their clan can they get anything done.

So far talking about Russia is as civilized and politically productive as the Russian wilderness.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on February 28, 2017, 06:33:19 AM
94549...

Hiliary Clinton is in the anger stage of her election loss.....hasn't completely come out of the " denial"
Stage.

Anyone who loves or still "likes" (I'll use facebook code language here)
Mrs Clinton does not GET why the REST OF US ----socialist, progressive, social liberal libertarian, green libertarian, tea party libertarian, fiscal conservative, social conservative, religious conservative, and yes, even Republicans
Do NOT "like" her.....

Read this if you still like her.....
And tell me if you are not merely, simply irritated by 30 plus years of clogged up, corrupt, chum stuck in our government pipes.

Prepare yourself because this is what the rest of us who are not even remotely pleased with Hillary Clinton have read, heard or felt.....

Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton walk in to a bar.




Donald leans over, and with a smile on his face, says:


    “The media is really tearing you apart for that Scandal.”
    Hillary: “You mean my lying about Benghazi?”
    Trump: “No, the other one.”
    Hillary: “You mean the massive voter fraud?”
    Trump: “No, the other one.”
    Hillary: “You mean the military not getting their votes counted?”
    Trump: “No, the other one.”
    Hillary: “Using my secret private server with classified material to Hide my Activities?”
    Trump: “No, the other one.”
    Hillary: “The NSA monitoring our phone calls, emails and everything Else?”
    Trump: “No, the other one.”
    Hillary: “Using the Clinton Foundation as a cover for tax evasion, Hiring Cronies, And taking bribes from foreign countries?”
    Trump: “No, the other one.”
    Hillary: “You mean the drones being operated in our own country without The Benefit of the law?”
    Trump: “No, the other one.”
    Hillary: “Giving 123 Technologies $300 Million, and right afterward it Declared Bankruptcy and was sold to the Chinese?”
    Trump: “No, the other one.”
    Hillary: “You mean arming the Muslim Brotherhood and hiring them in the White House?”
    Trump: “No, the other one.”
    Hillary: “Whitewater, Watergate committee, Vince Foster, commodity Deals?”
    Trump: “No the other one:”
    Hillary: “Turning Libya into chaos?”
    Trump: “No the other one:”
    Hillary: “Being the mastermind of the so-called “Arab Spring” that only brought chaos, death and destruction to the Middle East and North Africa?”
    Trump: “No the other one:”
    Hillary: “Leaving four Americans to die in Benghazi?”
    Trump: “No the other one:”
    Hillary: “Trashing Mubarak, one of our few Muslim friends?”
    Trump: “No the other one:”
    Hillary: “The funding and arming of terrorists in Syria, the destruction and destabilization of that nation, giving the order to our lapdogs in Turkey and Saudi Arabia to give sarin gas to the “moderate” terrorists in Syria that they eventually used on civilians, and framed Assad, and had it not been for the Russians and Putin, we would have used that as a pretext to invade Syria, put a puppet in power, steal their natural resources, and leave that country in total chaos, just like we did with Libya?
     Trump: “No the other one:”
    Hillary: “The creation of the biggest refugees crisis since WWII?”
    Trump: “No the other one:”
    Hillary: “Leaving Iraq in chaos? ”
    Trump: “No, the other one.”
    Hillary: “The DOJ spying on the press?”
    Trump: “No, the other one.”
    Hillary: “You mean HHS Secretary Sibelius shaking down health insurance Executives?”
    Trump: “No, the other one.”
    Hillary: “Giving our cronies in SOLYNDRA $500 MILLION DOLLARS and 3 Months Later they declared bankruptcy and then the Chinese bought it?”
    Trump: “No, the other one.”
    Hillary: “The NSA monitoring citizens’ ?”
    Trump: “No, the other one.”
    Hillary: “The State Department interfering with an Inspector General Investigation on departmental sexual misconduct?”
    Trump: “No, the other one.”
    Hillary: “Me, The IRS, Clapper and Holder all lying to Congress?”
    Trump: “No, the other one.”
    Hillary: “Threats to all of Bill’s former mistresses to keep them quiet?”
    Trump: “No, the other one.”
    Hillary: “You mean the INSIDER TRADING of the Tyson chicken deal I did where I invested $1,000 and the next year I got $100,000?”
    Trump: “No, the other one.”
    Hillary: “You mean when Bill met with Attorney General, Loretta Lynch, just before my hearing with the FBI to cut a deal?”
    Trump: “No, the other one.”
    Hillary: “ You mean the one where my IT guy at Platte River Networks asked Reddit for help to alter emails?”
    Trump: “No, the other one.”
    Hillary: “You mean where the former Haitian Senate President accused me and my foundation of asking him for bribes?”
    Trump: “No, the other one.”
    Hillary: “You mean that old video of me laughing as I explain how I got the charges against that child rapist dropped by blaming the young girl for liking older men and fantasizing about them. Even though I knew the guy was guilty?
     Trump: “No, the other one.”
    Hillary: “You mean that video of me coughing up a giant green lunger into my drinking glass then drinking it back down?”
    Trump: “No, the other one.”
    Hillary: “You mean that video of me passing out on the curb and losing my shoe?”
    Trump: “No, the other one.”
    Hillary: “You mean when I robbed Bernie Sanders of the Democratic Party Nomination by having the DNC rig the nomination process so that I would win?”
    Trump: “No, the other one.”
    Hillary: “You mean how so many people that oppose me have died in mysterious was?”
    Trump: “No, the other one.”
    Hillary: “Travel Gate? When seven employees of the White House Travel Office were fired so that friends of Bill and mine could take over the travel business? And when I lied under oath during the investigation by the FBI, the Department of Justice, the White House itself, the General Accounting Office, the House Government Reform and Oversight Committee, and the Whitewater Independent Counsel?”
    Trump: “No, the other one.”
    Hillary: “The scandal where, (while I was Secretary if State), the State Department signed off on a deal to sell 20% of the USA’s uranium to a Canadian corporation that the Russians bought, netting a $145 million donation from Russia to the Clinton Foundation and a $500,000 speaking gig for Bill from the Russian Investment Bank that set up the corporate buyout?. That scandal?”
    Trump: “No, the other one.”
    Hillary: “That time I lied when I said I was under sniper fire when I got off the plane in Bosnia?”
    Trump: “No, the other one.”
    Hillary: “That time when after I became the First Lady, I improperly requested a bunch of FBI files so I could look for blackmail material on government insiders?”
    Trump: “No, the other one.”
    Hillary: “That time when Bill nominated Zoe Baird as Attorney General, even though we knew she hired illegal immigrants and didn’t pay payroll taxes on them?”
    Trump: “No, the other one.”
    Hillary: “When I got Nigeria exempted from foreign aid transparency guidelines despite evidence of corruption because they gave Bill a $700,000 in speaking fees?”
    Trump” “No, the other one.”
    Hillary: “That time in 2009 when Honduran military forces allied with rightist lawmakers ousted democratically elected President Manuel Zelaya, and I as then-Secretary of State sided with the armed forces and fought global pressure to reinstate him?”
    Trump: “No, the other one.”
    Hillary: “I give up! … Oh wait, I think I’ve got it! When I stole the White House furniture, silverware, when Bill left Office?”
    Trump: “THAT’S IT! I almost forgot about that one”.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on February 28, 2017, 07:24:06 AM
Dear Nan,

Hi there Ms. Pelosi.  You dont know me but we have known you for many many many many many many many many many years.

It is time to retire.  You are obviously battling some human physical and mental development issues....

I mean, telling people to pass a massive 800 page bill before reading it?  My teachers in school would say that is incorrectly following directions.....detention for me.

So, while we know you are preoccupied with president trumps win, realize that you are wasting the American peoples time by focusing on Donald trumps taxes......

We Americans dont give a white about it....we want the economy to open up and we want jobs to fix our infrastructure.....

So, annoying shite you pull in the house....wasting time is why Donald trump was elected....cut through the bullshite...
Forcing Republicans to vote on getting to the bottom of his taxes and the Russian hacking of your democratic party is frivolous, the former and silly, the latter.

Who cares about his taxes. And, who cares that you didn't have cyber security....its embarrassing that you were hacked-------

But the hacking had no effect on the election.

Also, I dont think you are still considered a member of the universal church---because when you execute and crush a fetus head at 7 months development----- you just killed a human being....

At about 4 to 5 months the human brain distinguishes us from other animals and while in the first couple of months of embryonic development this issue might be considered a "reproductive female rights" issue after about four or five months it becomes a "human rights" issue. 

So, of course supporting late term abortions unless the life of the mother is in jeopardy is pretty much a sentence of execution on that human in development.....hell, Nancy, you are concerned about whales, minks, and otters----and we are humane with killing cows, pigs and deer----how about human beings?

Nan,  your brain does not seem to be functioning like a fully developed human being any more....but we only wish the best for you and maybe you would retire.

You are obviously a confused human being....but we respect your human rights to continue to exist and to continue becoming and developing as a human being.

Get it Mancy?😉

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on March 03, 2017, 07:28:48 AM
95352...

Democrats.....not smart people...do not read this😉....because you are in denial/anger stage of coping with loss and it may piss you off.

.....barack Obama said I have a pen and a phone.

....oldfellah harry Reid, got rid of the filibuster....

Now Republicans and trump are taking advantage of this.

So, suck it up.


.....democrats believe that with utilization of the (highly biased and inaccurate) new York times, Washington post, Newsweek, CNN, NBC for example to attack the laser beam focus on immigration
.

For all trumps clumsiness and abrasive talk he is bringing about immigration regulation that is sorely needed....

White people. (ill write in words that bigoted clintonistas can understand) have been coming here with a travel visa for decades---making money and then overstaying their visas......fact.

But the democratic party does not talk about this....they see open borders as a way to MAKE more money for the government...

The crux....more registered democrats coming from anywhere but Europe is ok.

Europe has settled in the USA since its formation....other countries have had their troubles getting accepted throughout America's history.

Irish Italian need not apply----this was the bigoted greeting in shop windows and periodicals in the 1800s up till the next century...

So.....immigrant shake down is old news.

The gravy train will now have a cap on it....regulation which died in the senate under bush Jr. Is now going to be addressed...

Democrats only say they fight for black and brown people and immigrants because they want them to vote Democrat....period end if story.

So the racism purported is real and messy just like the bigoted democratic party was before Republicans and Johnson lit a fire under other democrats asses.

The democratic party had been the party of money since they supported slavery.

The democrats want everyone who wants to come here to see that they are the party of black, red, brown, yellow, green, rainbow people......they focus on the bigoted difference in an individual and mark it against a party which focuses on the individual----now I am not going to get into the many problems of the Republican party---especially the bigots who judge people because of religion but the democrats problem is worse and totally racist.

Identity politics is exposed for the bigotry it heightens....and trump will/is coming down heavy with serious immigration policy.

The democratic party has been trying to use reverse-racism with regard to people who come here from non European countries....feigning support for humans in favor of voter membership.....

Some of us see this.

This country was built on immigrants but they are individuals.....not brown, black, Muslim or Buddhist....

And immigrants will continue to build this country but democrats must now go along with Republicans to fix our immigration system

And it cannot be tabled.....

I'm hoping there are a lot of immigrants who see things from a libertarian point of view....not a let me get free.stuff point of view--- because there are legitimate people who need free stuff----our legal citizens who are poor or disabled.

But stop draining on the battery of the USA and get legitimate fairly....get in line. Work hard, pay taxes, and care!

Immigration regulation---- democrats should love regulation....is here!!!!

Democrats will now have a cap on the amount of people they can try to manipulate into voting for their klan of "identity" politics.....but god forbid if you are a conservative whitey from Yorkshire England.....they do not want you.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on March 03, 2017, 08:49:16 AM
Here are the facts.
Democratic party had four old redskinned wrinkly old men and one redfaced old lady running for potus.
All of European immigrants
Screaming that they are supporting brown, black, female, rainbow, immigrant people.

Then on the Republican side we had 17 candidates who had 1 black man, 2 Latinos, and one middle aged female running...

This party was running on changing the economy for everyone.  Not only women, gay people and some ethnicities.

A serious visceral difference....

Looks like the Republican party is the party of diversity because at the core it is the importance of the individual....not the group.

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on March 04, 2017, 06:55:07 AM
can’t be blamed.

2. Now, how ’bout that revolution? Sarandon was right there, too. OK, “revolution” may be too strong a word. But she is correct in saying that Trump’s presidency has woken up people in a way that never would have happened if Clinton had won. The popular retort to this is: Oh, but Clinton would have been much better than Trump. So there would have been no need for revolution! Therein lies the crux of the liberal con.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on March 07, 2017, 08:08:38 AM
95914

Come on Nancy Pelosi....

Kelly Ann Conway is a Republican. 

Cedric's double entendre regarding her being on her knees on the sofa at the oval office cannot be sexist because

Sexism doesnt count when it affects Republicans.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on March 09, 2017, 06:11:14 AM
96203...

Hillary Clinton's foundation is sinking but for many years she built up ties with anyone who would give her money in return for political opportunity be it foreign government leaders, domestic lobbying groups, domestic activists, foreign business women and men, and of course rich campaign doners.

Essentially, she acts like a king.  It sidesteps ALL government groups checks and balances.....oligarchical leader/influencer.....a king. Or a king maker----

It is pure pay to play but seemingly legal because "everyone knows king hillary".....because it was set up to be simple and to thwart traditional watchdog measurements.

The dismantalling is happening.....when she lost the election the air began releasing from her coffers tires.


WikiLeaks busted her.  Clinton, because she is notoriously lazy, years ago brought an actual "reset" button which really said something to the effect overcharge or double charge......she looked STUPID.

PUTIN, as a former kgb operative and interrogator saw through her bullshite and Putin relished dealing with the novice Obama--- who never quite found a way around his term restrictions.....could not handle Russian ascendency.

So, the Russian hacking of the DNC and all the other hackings by various rogue elements is quite telling.


America is vulnerable to outside forces and the media has played on this fear.

Obama tried to look tough by putting sanctions on Russia before he left office and put focus on Trumps words where he requested the Russians to intercede, and release the corruption information regarding Hillary.

This is all laughable and pathetic.

But ultimately the only goal accomplished of making the trump organization appear treasonous is a stall to his administration because most Americans dont buy it.

Trump is smart in saying that his office was bugged because now the FBI director is asking his bosses to formally denounce the bugging claim.

Trump gave the FBI one week to say that the whole "Russian collusion" is a farce.....but Comey wouldn't budge. 

So the media focus is now be Ing shifted into something more interesting to "conspiracy theorists" regarding "deep government operatives", cia surveillance, FBI surveillance....

Trumps Russian connection is beginning to fade into the background and would be totally done as a media fixation if the FBI would simply say in Obama's words


There is no there there.....lmfao!!!!

Like it or not trump and his screening of people from countries with serious civil unrest is just what Obama did. 

I love the new term for screenings



Travel Ban!?????  That is a laughable term.

Try to get on a plane in Israel....they have had travel bans in place since the 70's.

Trump will now set congress to work on immigration regulation and balancing the budget.

I love how trump played the FBI against itself.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on March 09, 2017, 06:16:54 AM
One of the mantras of us green libertarians is live free or die.....we accept governmental social programs but less government is much better than the bloated federal government and hacking and pruning is necessary.

Trump is a Democrat but he is a Democrat who doesn't like political correctness and he doesn't like to be bullshitted he wants to cut through bureaucratic bloat....hell if he started pushing the notion of term limits it would be a dream come true...

Like it or not he is bringing tough hard change to our government.

It's needed.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on March 10, 2017, 07:09:59 AM
96416....

Her Opponent



When you watch the play her opponent it is crystal clear why trump resonates with the average frustrated american---- who doesn't give a shite about racist/sexist/religionist identity politics.

Identity politics are racist and bigoted....that is a fact..until democrats and progressives understand this they will LOSE.

The female Donald trump walked all over the male Hillary Clinton...

Why?  Because the gender had nothing to do with the message and will of the people.

No one really gives a shite about gender politics


The play where the genders of trump and Clinton are switched shines a light on how manipulative Hillary media surrogates ny times wash post Newsweek CNN NBC la times were.....and how wrong they were.


Enlightening.

Hillary and her lazy work ethic were what was really exposed.

She is a real tool....and a shill

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on March 10, 2017, 07:20:18 AM
Just how many women took off work for as day without a women?

Most people know....mothers and women rule the world and the home.

....progressives haven't gotten the message yet....

....the new York times and la times and Washington post are behind the times on this one....

Wake up!!!!!!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on March 19, 2017, 07:35:16 AM
The democratic partys newspaper the struggling tabloid new York Times wrote an article announcing hillarys run for the presidency in 2020....

She began her groveling-apology tour in Scranton pa.-----  The site where she lost many votes to Donald trump to begin repairing the damage she did to herself.

Good luck hil.....most pensylvanians cant stand you enough so that they voted for foul mouthed trump.

Seriously, if Hillary is smart....shell go away.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on March 20, 2017, 05:01:48 AM
97813.....

So, I am not a fan of the establishment Republican Party perhaps not to the degree that I find almost no value in the corrupt democratic Party....but it is telling to watch how a sociopathic liar like Hillary Clinton's warped rationale operates....


She just said she wants to be a healer and uniter??????? To help the polar political differences come together????

Really? How?

I mean Hillary has said publically how much she despises Republicans..

Didn't she call them "deplorable"????

Then there is her ENEMIES list.

How stupid is she? How does she think shr can con her way out of her own ideology?

ANDERSON  COOPER: Which enemy that you made during your political career are you most proud of?

CLINTON: Well, in addition to the NRA, the health insurance companies, the drug companies, the Iranians; probably the Republicans



Hillary, stay lost in the fuxhing woods.....do us all a big favor, huh lady?

..you know, "get lost a-hole" that's it in a nutshell.😉
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on March 28, 2017, 05:41:13 AM
98654...

So, the Washington post, the new York times have abandoned honest news coverage.

The "intrigue" of Russian spies and soviet union covert operations, and James bond stories are fun to read but as far as holding relevant serious political or legal value anything beyond entertainment would be a foolish surmise.

These stories about Russia are fun and actually great smokescreens for trump to keep pushing through his agenda of draining the swamp and slicing massive steak cuts from the federal government.

Reagan couldn't do it.... Obama added goose fat and Trump is melting the bloat...



Hillary Clinton lost the election big time and will try to gain her favorable rating back so she can possible rub again in 2020. But i am almost positive that she lost an election margin of victory with the defection of democrats to trump.

She will NEVER get those votes back and could never ever win a national election.

Why? She is not a person of action.  She is an obvious corrupt politician who lacks simple integrity and compassion...

Too many Americans know that she let Americans die in Libya and she is a vicious warmonger...."crowing about the murder of the despot, QuDafi."

So, allow the Times and Post their spy stories to capture your imagination because that is about all these fluffy stories will affect.

Wake up! Trump will be in office for another 4 years.  And if Hillary tries to run again....Trump has already won that election by what he has accomplished in 2 months...

Reality check.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on April 02, 2017, 09:16:40 PM
So, how many fools think clinton could legitimately win the nomination for her party again?

We know that trolls like Loki will be bullshitting about probability models when he predicted nothing correct....especially the criminal investigation into hillarys gross negligence with regard to classified compartmentalized information...
That troll still doesn't know who Jim Comey is.  Nah, jim Comey and the FBI affected hillarys campaign very little if you ask dummdums like Lol.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on April 02, 2017, 09:21:32 PM
Hopefully the trolls are gone.  That speech from hilllary the other day about policy was so effective.... She managed to put an entire row of young college students to sleep....all the yawning....what a phoenomena

She is more boring than my undergrad physics professor.

Maybe if she sends out enough tweets and talks about trump enough she can still beat him.   Or maybe she'll get him impeached and then she can take his place.


Hahahahahahaahahahahahahahaah ahahahahahahaahahah.

Witch is dead.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on April 02, 2017, 09:23:23 PM
...99294 and one troll ;)...caught him looking....ha!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on April 03, 2017, 05:28:30 AM
Susan Bordo, a self described feminist was crying black tears that her "idol" Hillary Clinton lost to trump.

The whining is not effective and unbecoming....

Face it "little Suzie"----Hillary (haha autocorrect spells it this way) lost.  She will never hold a national office of importance....again--ding ding the witch is dead.

Hillary Clinton is not a progressive, nor is she a feminist---she is an underhanded opportunist.

Little suzes article falls flat when she attempts to write down hiliarys AccomPlishMents---affordable care act, really?  Is that something of an accomplishment for her??? Equal pay for women, really? That award goes to Hillary? Then its "children" ok? C.h.i.p.? Was that all Hillary too?

So, what else?....nothing
You know what? The only real accomplishment Hillary has is Assisting in getting the "Q" line akin 2nd avenue in Manhattan.....maybe? If you leave out all the planning and Mayor Giuliani and Mayor Bloomberg.

So little suze--your writing pedestrians a green pathway of apologizing for American culture not understanding that Hillary is a saint and is not now an out of touch rich European American....who was caught many times lying about trivial and dire matters.  And is an unscrupulous money grubbing shill- who benefits that she stayed married to a proven cheater and abuser of women...is that feminism? Little size?
Little suze is an idiot to think most people can't smell 👃 hillarys stink to" stand by her man"

I dont think that Hillary is anything feminist at all....most of America who are even in her own party wont buy that crap and I Suze still sells it---hopefully less students will attend her seemingly misguided ideology.
She should probably retire from teaching and writing fluff-- like her article in" the guildian."

Hillarys accomplishments are akin to James Buchanan...at least he made it to the presidency

How bad does hiliary look that she lost to trump?

...nobodys buying it little suze....and Clinton is a part of the democratic elite--- nose up asss corporate warmongering political class.

Good riddance.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on April 03, 2017, 05:42:47 AM
Omg...

Suze B didn't even mention hillarys shining feminist chops regarding defending a rapist and laughing about it.  How she easily stole justice from a 12 year old girl.

That 12 year olds life was ruined....is that protecting women? Is that standing up for children?

Hillarys laughing voice was caught on tape admitting to this sick crime.

So ms. Suze forgive me if I gag a little on your stinking foul article that is light on reality and heavy on base ignorance.

....thats right Read it!!!!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on April 04, 2017, 04:59:17 AM
Amy Chozik a new York times shill....and Bennet and Barnes wrote this article today about one of the worst politicians in history.

They think perhaps that this politician STILL is running for president so they wanted to onec again

Sell us some rotting dead animal meat....stinking old feces...
I'm laughing hard because AMERICANS dont eat this crap....

TOO LATE to the table the morons at the new York times are recycling a tired old hack of a politicians early career to show how great this shills career was.

It's bullshite

Here is there article



James Buchanan, Jr. was born in a log cabin in Cove Gap, Pennsylvania (now Buchanan's Birthplace State Park), in Franklin County, on April 23, 1791, to James Buchanan, Sr. (1761–1821), a businessman, merchant, and farmer, and Elizabeth Speer, an educated woman (1767–1833).[4] His parents were both of Ulster Scots descent, the father having emigrated from Milford, County Donegal, Ireland, in 1783. One of eleven siblings, Buchanan was the oldest child in the family to survive infancy. Shortly after Buchanan's birth the family moved to a farm near Mercersburg, Pennsylvania, and in 1794 the family moved to Mercersburg itself. Buchanan's father became the wealthiest person in town, becoming a prosperous merchant and investing in real estate.[5] The family home in Mercersburg was later turned into the James Buchanan Hotel.[6]

Buchanan attended the village academy (Old Stone Academy) and, starting in 1807, Dickinson College in Carlisle, Pennsylvania.[7] Though he was nearly expelled at one point for poor behavior, he pleaded for a second chance and subsequently graduated with honors on September 19, 1809.[8] Later that year, he moved to Lancaster, which, at the time, was the capital of Pennsylvania. James Hopkins, the most prominent lawyer in Lancaster, accepted Buchanan as a student, and in 1812 Buchanan was admitted to the bar after an oral exam. Though many other lawyers moved to Harrisburg, Pennsylvania after it became the capital of the Pennsylvania in 1812, Lancaster would remain Buchanan's home town for the rest of his life. Buchanan's income quickly rose after he established his own practice, and by 1821 he was earning over $11,000 per year (equivalent to $197,918 in 2016). Buchanan handled various types of cases, including a high-profile impeachment trial in which he successfully defended Pennsylvania Judge Walter Franklin.[9]

Buchanan began his political career in the Pennsylvania House of Representatives (1814–16) as a member of the Federalist Party.[10] The legislature met for only three months a year, and Buchanan's notoriety as a legislator helped him earn clients for his legal practice.[11] Like his father, Buchanan believed in federally-funded internal improvements, a high tariff, and a national bank. He emerged as a strong critic of the leadership of Democratic-Republican President James Madison during the War of 1812.[12] When the British invaded neighboring Maryland in 1814, he enlisted as a private in Henry Shippen's Company, 1st Brigade, 4th Division, Pennsylvania Militia, a unit of light dragoons, and served in the defense of Baltimore.[11][13] Buchanan is the only president with military experience who did not, at some point, serve as an officer.[14
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on April 04, 2017, 05:09:06 AM
99596..

James Buchanan was a disaster.  And his early career mirrors Hillary Clinton's in that they both struggled as lawyers and then tried to con everybody that they "evolved" or told people what they thought folks wanted to hear....

And ultimately failed to accomplish anything of any merit.

Buchanon brought us The Civil War.
Hiliary brought Lybias Civil War and Benghazi deaths.

TWO ineffectual lazy Fuchs.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on April 15, 2017, 07:56:15 AM
....100940

I knew hiliary Clinton was never going to be elected President.

It is NO shock to me that she lost.

At ALL!!!!

I never believed all of the state polls.
If you were shocked, you might stop drinking koolaide.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on April 15, 2017, 05:22:47 PM
101002...

David Mascriota, who writes for Salon had a beautifully written article full of sound and fury yet signifying nothing.

Why? Because he doesn't want to write about the obvious base lies of Hillary Clinton.

I'll just write about two of them--
First, Hillary claimed that she and Chelsea arrived in former Yugoslavia under a hail of gunfire--and had to duck and run...
Then video emerged that in reality she arrived smiling, walking slowly and waving when she and Chelsea landed there.

A lie, small?  It's a major problem when a politician openly speaks about a serious event to draw sympathy and then we find out it was not factual---hypocritical and base.

Then, same politician borrows a line of rebuttal and chastisement from someone else--you are entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts--and then makes up her own facts--again, but reinforced hypotitical nature.

Then, same politician stands over the dead bodies of people-- knowing full well how their deaths occurred through a militarily planned guerrilla attack--but chooses instead to belittle, simplify and remove the dignity which they deserve by blaming a video...

So, David wrote an article without examining any of the reasons why people would never put this woman in a position of governing.

There is also a great deal more of Hillary Clinton's failures--but David blames sexism...

This is laughable!

There are many brilliant women in politics today--Hillary is not one of them.

Her shrill, voice was the least of her problems.

Her marriage of convenience to bill Clinton and her  enabling her husbands dalliances shows that she deeply doesn't really care about the women bill hurt...
How is that fighting for women? In any way?

Hillary is a half baked Peron...sent into this world scarcely made up...
Blame God for why she lost. It's a more solid argument, David.

Lmfao!!!

This dude is a very late to the game apologist...
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on April 15, 2017, 05:39:36 PM
There are many women in politics who have been brilliant and successful...
There are many women in politics who continue to be successful and have risen to the top...
How did they get through all the misogyny and sexist attacks but not Hillary???

That is the question to ask.

Hillary is a misogynistic "looney toon" herself....

Ask yourself the question? Put the kookaide  down...

Do you think Hillary Clinton is a narcissistic looney toon?

Is that sexist for me to ask this question?

Also, check out the film, The Contender " in it a politician stages his own form of "heroics" like arriving in a war-torn country to smiles and waves---but instead claim that you heroically survived a hail of gunfire.

Please....that lie alone is what sunk hiliary for most "angry male Americans" and most "angry female Americans"...



Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on April 20, 2017, 08:52:40 PM
100165...


With all the hubub coming from hiliarys new book which is called Shattered its a wonder how so many people got her "inevitable" win wrong.
I knew she was not going to make it and so many koolaide drinkers--like two "supposed lawyers" on this board....one maintain Ing a low profile and the other one who I lol about....didn't quite grasp the political gravity of hiliarys secret e mail set up to thwart inquiry, and keep her "pay to play" operation open which the FBI found criminal negligence but chose not to prosecute.....
Thank god Comey verbal indicted her back in July 2016. And exposed her criminal mid deeds.....hell...even Aaron Hernandez was not convicted of murders he actually committed and the one he was sent to jail for is bow null and void.....ah justice.

But I digress....
Many if us knew that hiliarys campaign was a mess.
Deny, obfuscate and move on do not work anymore, bubba!

She ruined herself--- she, like guilty folk of course knew it--- so did many others.

Who cares? Who feels sorry? Stupid people who dont pay attention to disingenuous base dangerous and incompetent behavior.

Now the best part--- what was truly some awesome "shade" thrown missa hilliarys way today came at the hands of ted Nugent, kid rock and Sarah Palin. Sarah Palin for all her faults is a strong feminist opportunist. Yes, she clings to guns and religion but those are guaranteed in the constitution. And she has every right to mock hillarys loss and rub it in hillarys face.
Ted Nugent and kid rock are the salt in the wound....but hell, this is america and Hillary needs to know that despite their deep faults and somewhat warped ideology have a right to mock the first lady.
It is funny to see those three around her "fake smiling visage" gesturing and showing disdain.
Hillary deserves every bit of it.

Hillary mocked the deaths of Americans in Libya....by standing over their dead bodies and blaming a video....

Sorry folks....that is worse.

So while I'm a green libertarian. Hillary is a warmonger....mocked the death of kadhafi. Laughed about ruining a 12 year old girls life wo was raped. And I'm not a fan of many conservative values.
Hillary is still worse....

So, let the mockery continue until Hillary is retired. Lmfao

I dont like kid rock at all...he is not talented but he recognized that we needed real radical change in our country.....not obama change... ted Nugent for all his bigoted statements supports the 2nd amendment and Sarah Palin is a feminist... Like it or not.

That bit of shade was awesome....


So, for many of you reading this....in that you despise or find distasteful those pictures of the trio posed in front of Clinton.
Now you know how I along with others feel about Hillary herself.

Feels good doesn't it.
We are free of Clinton and her sexist ideology toward women who she and bill destroyed and those who died following hiliarys warmongering narcissistic policies


Do you feel the Bern????

Well you should. And next time you'll listen.
Bernie could have beaten trump.
How does that feel???
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on April 20, 2017, 08:59:43 PM
101686....

Dont believe me? Look at how Bernie did in the rust belt.

Meh.😉
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on April 22, 2017, 06:11:28 PM
101846...

Repeat after me.  To win the presidency of the united states one must win the most electoral votes;full stop.

Winning the popular vote means nothing.....nothing....becaus e, that will not win the presidency and it is stupid to think that hillarys 5 trillion or 50 trillion votes in California or New York shows serious ignorance....that logic alone touted by the Clinton "post election koolaide clean the white stains out of hiliarys diapers" shoes that its a good thing she IS out of political clout.

Get it? If you are a person who has said that Hillary winning the popular vote means anything at all you are precious and folks privately laugh at your puerile naivety.😉😄😄😄😄

Trump won the popular vote where it counted....like in Pennsylvania.


Huma will write a book to bring her boss back from the dead.
But huma was ordered to do it and is beating a dead horse.

Hillary is finished.. accept, regret, retreat, defeat. Hillary lost.

Winning Texas or California or new York means nothing

Didn't Mondale win the popular vote in one state????

Laughable.
Fun to mock
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on May 01, 2017, 10:04:12 PM

.108240....

........i guess I wasn't alone in thinking hiliary political career was over after Benghazi and her illegal email setup....

Others didn't like her either....like i said many times....democrats dont even like her...

....here is an oldie but a goodie from a koolaide drinker who has been vanquished to the "just so" chorus.....hahahaaha!!!!



Yawn,

Pardon, but I know nixon wasn't tried nor convicted. Not the point, either.  But he could have been put on trial.

Vos sumo non intelligere.

Cinnamon,

I think that you are failing to understand. You seem outrage and/or entertained. There's only one problem- when everything is an outrage, nothing is. When we can add -gate to every controversy (quick- are you a Brady supporter or hater), then who cares? More importantly, when everything devolves into an undifferentiated mass of "Benghazi / Fast & Furious / Vince Foster / Whitewater / Birth Certificate / Lois Lerner / Unprecedented Executive Power / NSA / whatevs" then people tune out. They tune out even more when the stakes seem so ... petty and small.

More importantly, you make the common mistake of believing that other people care *the exact way* that you care. First, the people that care the same way you care is small. Second, there is another, equally small, portion of people that care an equal, but opposite, direction as you do. Finally, the vast majority of people *don't care.* The can't name the Supreme Court justices, are hard pressed to name their own (federal) Senators, and haven't a prayer of naming their own state legislators ... let alone the ones outside of their district. That's fine- they have better things to do- watch football, make money, play with their children. They will probably start tuning into the election, kinda, sometime next year.

But, sure, the keyboard commandos will have fun. One side will say, "But, but, but, X person violated the law." And one side will say, "Partisan witchhunt." And 99% of the time, it's just background noise. Guess what? Nothing will happen, people will move on, and one side will vaguely remember a partisan witchhunt, and one side will vaguely remember that Hillary Clinton broke the law and got away with it. But most people just won't care, except for the influx of stupid ads during the election.

Same as it ever was. Does that mean nothing will happen this time? I don't know for sure- unlike you, I don't make dramatic and certain pronouncements. But I make probabilistic (Bayesian) assessments based on what I know, and I'm willing to back them up. You? Eh.... It seems you're not as confident in your ability to predict. Because something tells me that deep down, you enjoy making big statements, but fear that like Charlie Brown and Lucy, you've been sold a false of goods. That you're very excited to kick that football, but .... well, you should know enough by now to know you'll end up on your behind.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on May 04, 2017, 08:50:48 PM
.....103216..

So Gersh Kuntsman
...ahem big supporter of hiliarys until.....a real libber.

1. She was, indeed, untrustworthy: Remember her fainting spell at the 9/11 ceremony? Remember how long it took for her to tell the truth? Remember how that reminded every voter in America that Hillary Clinton’s first instinct is to lie? Just like she did when she claimed she had taken sniper fire during a First Lady trip to Bosnia. Just as she did when she said she never sent classified documents over her private email server
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on May 04, 2017, 08:55:03 PM
2. She ran a very poor campaign: Clinton will likely point out on page 1 that she stayed “on message” when Donald Trump shambled and grabbed p------ all over the place. But Clinton did not have a message beyond, “I’m not with stupid.”

She had genuine experience serving the public and understanding how the government works. She had an entire party establishment clearing the decks for her (and giving her the debate questions!). And she was running against a madman.

But when she called half the country the “basket of deplorables,” it was pretty much over.

[…]

3. She set up a private email server: It’s basic. The only reason to set up a private email server — and delete some of the emails on it — is because you want to hide something from the public. Clinton never provided a good answer to the simple question, “Why would you do that?”

4. Those Goldman-Sachs speeches. You can’t be a prostitute on Wall Street and then go to church on Main Street.

Hillary Clinton’s failures gave us President Donald Trump.

[…]

The American public does not want a book from Hillary Clinton. It wants an abject apology. And it wants it for free. She got what she deserved: She lost.

Now she needs to shut up and go home.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on May 04, 2017, 09:01:08 PM
....kuntaman forgot...

Amazing hiliary doesn't know most of us dont like her.

Warmongering....in Iraq..

Letting Americans die....and then say "what difference , at this point does it make?"

Funny that Clinton warmongered in Libya....stood over dead heroes and blamed a video...

Hiliary will be hearing about her twice vanquished and now permanent end to politics....good luck making money now....fools will help...but essentially its dead in the water...

Hillarys run for president 2 times?
What difference does it make?  She lost.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on May 06, 2017, 05:12:04 AM
........103636

That's right, one of the clowns on cable....not bill o rielly....another bill .....maher...bill Maher just pointed out the problem with neopolitik


Playing "identity politics" is a dog whistle ?  No it is a bullhorn of "racist politics" and that is one of the primary reasons the democrats are out of power.

So, changing that error would turn course... Until then the gop which is often accused of being a racist party will continue to win.  Democrats dont know that the cloak of identity politics is an albatross of factual racism.

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on May 08, 2017, 09:36:21 PM
104320...

So the Clinton foundation is washed up.
Bill bob Clinton is going to help write a book...shucks. He can't even type.....so the book will be mostly hype.

Hillary is going to try to put together yet another super pac.
...good luck with that. Anyone stupid enough to keep giving this lady more money is if course a fool.

She lost biatches....she is a two time loser.

Mondale, Dukakis, and Hilliary are the biggest losers in politics....Hillary has lost twice.

Kerry and McCain did better than these three.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on May 09, 2017, 07:44:28 AM
104394...

So, the million dollar question.
The question which will make many people money trying to scrawl out stories about hiliary Clinton.

The most recent politician to hit the loser dustbin of political history...along with Dukakis and Mondale.

Why do so many people  not approve, dislike even hate hilliary Clinton?

Those who like Hillary dont seem to get it.

I will answer the question of why Clinton is so viscerally despised.


Hiliary Clinton is DISINGENUOUS.
Her poor ability to obfuscate makes this chalkboard scratchingly clear.

Get it.

The million dollar word is ....

Disingenuous.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on May 11, 2017, 08:16:34 PM
104798..

So, James Comey fired....hmmm

And Andrew McCabe says that FBI was outraged that Hillary Clinton wasn't prosecuted....

When others who had been less criminally negligent than she or committed far less transgressions were prosecuted more vigorously and expeditiously....
Now that makes sense.  I knew we would slowly get to the bottom of Hillarys crime.

Also, I'm laughing that all the dead people who vote and all the illegal votes which will now be investigated by the federal government.

Looks like some political parties will be thinning out of memberships.

So awesome.

Oh yeah, the Russians are still getting people in Pennsylvania to vote for trump even though the election is over...damn it we need to get to the bottom of this....grrr
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on May 11, 2017, 08:40:34 PM
....

Here, let me feed one of the trolls who peeks in here all the time...

My old buddy lol.
Remember this juicy nugget?

Espionage Act 18 U.S. Code s793,

Well, its back on the table....
Hilliary is going to need a new pink dress.
Lmfao!!!!!😉


Just broke out some new popcorn to watch the case reopen.
Blue corn, of course.


Pop pop pop!;!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on May 25, 2017, 08:50:35 PM
106446

Democrats are really bleeding out because Trump is not going to be impeached or anything like it...
The Tea party rose and affected the slow decline of the democratic corporate machine in power...

The democratic party is in shambles...
Focusing on removal of Trump---when--lets face it..democrats just helped vote him into power...is not good policy.

More house democratic seats will be lost--as racist or identity politics has not been abandoned.

As the jobs prospects in crease and as unemployment drops even a little....that truly helps trump.
He will probably be elected again if status quo continues.

Why? Because.the Russian collusion doesn't even matter to most people.
Democrats tried to rig the election for Hillary....
People....democrats in particular wont let that be forgotten anytime soon.

As long as Nancey Pelosi is still in power....the party is going to die.

I pray she stays in office a very long time...shes a great political barometer for failure
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on June 05, 2017, 10:47:31 PM
107804...

Why is Hillary Clinton still voicing her opinion about her election loss?

Move on Hillary, nobody really cares what you think anymore.
I am really feeling bored with her.

Just will pop back every now and then as her criminal  investigation continues.  Her superpac is dead in the water and her book will be a telling collapse because by the time it comes out less and less will care.

I was once worried that she might have beaten BaraknObama....but the DNC couldn't put the fix in for her back then because of the far left's interest in Obama and the trump wing of the Dem party went for Obama as well..

Hillary, nobody cares about you any more.

Move along. We've heard this all before. Hillary is old irrelevant news.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on June 06, 2017, 03:12:48 PM
107884..

So, is the democratic party now becoming "the hiliary Clinton party"?

Because all we hear about is loser of the election talk and hillary Clinton leading the sith lord résistance....

Democrats are going to be out of office for a while at this point. They need to right their ship. Drain the swamp and put Bernie in charge
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on July 24, 2017, 07:57:37 AM
....Clinton foundation? Done

Trump won.

Draining the swamp...

While media fixates on Russia, trump does what he wants...plus he feeds the story to keep it alive and distract democrats.

It's working...
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on July 28, 2017, 04:59:50 AM
110097...

....some people will buy a book about a loser like Hiliary Clinton although she lost because she
Is a congenital Liar and people know it....she us beyond diaingenuous---"put coal miners out of business"...those who votes for real...visceral...radical change from years of bullshite, political correctness get nothing done Harry Reid politics as democrats are a "basket full of deplorables".
Has a pay for play scam in place as secretary of state with her foundation.
Is caught lying about arriving in Bosnia under a hail of gunfire only to be discovered arriving waving and smiling.
Was busted by the cops mishandling and destroying classified information after trying to cover it up surreptitiously.

Let people die in Libya with no real security.
Stands over dead corpses at a funeral in front of their mothers and blames a YouTube video

And blames everyone but herself for her problems.

People would buy that book for sure.
Less the former.

Fuxk Clinton...she is on the assh heap of nixonion history-- but worse.
At least he became president and went to China.

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on July 28, 2017, 05:03:55 AM
Some, some may buy a book about a loser....much more would rather read about her cantankerous personality disorders and true failings.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on July 28, 2017, 05:06:08 AM
Oh yeah, almost forgot- bigoted self loathing xenophobic
 "identity politics"--
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on July 31, 2017, 01:36:05 PM
110638...

Lets make sure we know why final trump was elected and might be reelected.

1. Particularly Democrats and Republicans have promised to fix some basic and many complicated problems in the united states.
For many years it has been the same old shitt......republicans are at fault but mostly democrats.
...many democrats do not get it and probably never will. To bad. Donald trump is your boss now.
 the Russian bullshitt is and will not go anywhere....we know that is bullshitt too. Democrats think its real. It is not. More waste of time.

Obama was gridlocked because he was trying to sell more shitt.

The economy is a mess because of open trade borders and it needs restraint. Trump is the Rasputin.
Get it.

Americans are sick and tired if political "bill Maher" correctness.
Political correctness is more bullshitt.
"identity politique" is xenophobia and bigotry. And open immigration is a major problem in America. Plus, everybody in the USA is a descendent of immigrants, except for aboriginal Americans, like those who own casinos and own territory.

So, immigrants need to get in line...even doctors and nurses and start the process legally.

Security checks coming into the USA are not bans....they are security checks...like when you have to take off your shoes at the airport to travel from Chicago to NYC.
Tough shitt if you think it is a ban.
More bullshitt.

Jobs jobs jobs careers and college to careers are what we need.
Not people who speak like hiliary Clinton harry reid Nancy Pelosi Barbara retired boxer chuck shumer....the sell out from Massachusetts who was correctly told to wait til her next time to speak---and John McCain.

Term limits need to be established in federal government but since James Madison that will take some time because no one with a back bone gets through.

So until then loudmouthed gruff curt blunt people like trump are going to get elected.

Many Americans are sick and tired of social programs which have no fail safes.

Voting on economic issues are the most important issues to most Americans on the federal level........not social issues like spending money on abortions and more social programs.   we need a break from this and while social programs are wonderful they need to be tapered in a bit.

People need jobs first....infrastructure is the primary focus of most americans---even if they don't know it.

Spend money on that first and then get private businesses to add in to the work.

Germany makes wonderful beer in each hamlet, town and city....but they are not bringing in Anheuser bush and Budweiser....they are protecting their unique product.
There is nothing wrong with this.
Some is good but restraint is needed.

So social issues and spending will now take a backseat for a while till we get the reins in hand.

Americans are sick of elites who say Americans hate gay people and don't care about female rights and immigrants.  This is disingenuous stupidity.

We need to blow the system up...drain the swamp....focus on term limits.......vote the bums out....call bullshitt when we smell it and get some spending on jobs, careers and helping people get to college.

Trump is that quixotic agent that fix with democrats and Republicans minds.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on July 31, 2017, 01:37:35 PM
2.  Lol comes later
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on July 31, 2017, 01:43:28 PM
If Donald trump is fucxing with your mind then good😉 we are on the right track.  If he doesn't bother you at all then good....we are on the right track.

As long as trump bothers you realize that hi might get elected again.

Unless a politician comes along who pushes term limits so that lobbyists get frightened.....trump will probably get elected again.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 03, 2017, 05:02:27 AM
110988....

Laughing so hard this morning.
Some periodical wrote that the USA was about to depart from some normalcy regarding "loser" politicians. Lmfao.....

The criminal case against Hillary Clinton is still open.  It never was closed. Her Clinton foundation and pay for play and her gross negligence regarding classified information was never closed.

Congress is putting its foot down on investigating her....she is not some little old lady who is retired and stays home and bakes cookies----

She should stay home and bake cookies--- that would have been a wise move back during the 90s but she didn't....
Now the LAW is coming for her.

She was a corrupt politician......
The law went after Bernie madoff and the law went after Sheldon silver in NYC and many many other crooks.

Hilliary will have to face the music and this is not going to go away.

Pop pop pop....the popcorn isnao good especially since Hilliary is not just a loser candidate.....she is a "loser" loser candidate---
Has she admitted that her disaster is loss is all her fault yet...

with the blame on on her shoulders yet???????????????? Not jim Comey?

Oh? Now you know why the pressure on her will not let up!

A microscope beam is still tightly focused on her.

Well now you know.


And chuck shumer should realize that slowing down immigration in this country and getting a handle on it IS gping to happen....and not because people "hate" immigrants--- we are a nation of immigrants....but because there need to be checks and balances with immigration.

Ireland, for example has English as a national language...Polish is 2nd in rank, Chinese is third... The irish language is about 4th or 5th spoken read or understood by population size.....that is sad.

Just an obscure example to fuxx with your head.😉
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 13, 2017, 10:43:32 PM
112212...

Hmm, very interesting how much more is to come on Hilary Clinton and her pay to play as Secretary of State.

This lady will be ducking out of public life and having her publicity folks run much interference......
They have been doing for some time; so many dupes; so many favors owed.
However either her own be flummoxed health or the law is catching up to her.

I hope someone sends this little taunt her way of the very few who read from this "obscure" little board.

Fbi will keep digging into Hilary's corruption....

She should never ever ever stood over the four corpses and told the mothers and fathers of those soldiers that we were going to get the "person who made" a you tube video.  That was the day that she sold her entire soul and her comfort and her state of mind.

Oh to be one of the flys on the wall the night she knew that her run for president was crushed by Donald trump.

Hillary was enraged, so enraged. She is a true loser in any and every sense of the word.

Hell, she couldn't even get the front doors of a building in Chautauqua, NY open back in August of1992.......to make a grand entrance---she looked like a fool with egg on her face then, with her cheating husband in toe, and she looked like the biggest fool and morbid loser on election night last November.

We watched you Hillary when you couldn't get those two locked doors open---guess who locked them?
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 13, 2017, 10:46:55 PM
If you care to watch the video of Hilary's failure to open the doors in Chautauqua Ny back in summer of 1992.....August or perhaps July...lmfao.....you can search for it---al gore and his wife were there as well.

Such folly!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 13, 2017, 11:10:44 PM
112215...

For those of you who don't believe me......you are puerile.

The humiliation for Hillary began back in August 1992 with a locked door...


Here is the link......somebody locked the door a, 📐G🔬

For those who do believe me.....have a massive laugh at this!!!


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Eeg-9GXXuWY
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 13, 2017, 11:12:25 PM
... i ! wonder who locked the door?

So obscure.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 13, 2017, 11:13:40 PM
The fun begins at about 60seconds into the video.....then wait for it.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 14, 2017, 10:01:08 PM
Re read above
112306
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 15, 2017, 09:24:09 PM
There are people out there who are going to both buy and take Abby Hoffmann's advice regarding
The disingenuous, lying sack of shittte which a former candidate for president is about to release for the general public and shred it to pieces without having read a word of it and it is fabulous.

Abby Hoffman wrote a famous book which tells exactly what to do with this other persons book just to send this person a message....

And the message is to go take care of your grandchildren.....leave other people's grandchildren alone and start baking cookies.....which you should probably have done about 52 years ago.
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 15, 2017, 09:24:54 PM
112413
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 15, 2017, 09:27:16 PM

Just for fun this should be re read and the video should be watched....

Oh yes, I do blame a YouTube video for her public humiliation


112215...

For those of you who don't believe me......you are puerile.

The humiliation for Hillary began back in August 1992 with a locked door...


Here is the link......somebody locked the door a, 📐G🔬

For those who do believe me.....have a massive laugh at this!!!


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Eeg-9GXXuWY
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 15, 2017, 09:39:05 PM
Video 2246
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 21, 2017, 09:46:48 PM
So, as we near the end of the summer. We must be aware the the Clintons....and now we are going after bill Clinton as well as Hillary are.taking the democratic party down with them

The Clinton foundation had tentacles into foreign nations....taken money from Foreign companies....not Americans
 .....

So, lets make sure that we put our resources into taking out the Clintons....they have many people on there payroll... But Tues two.

One hiliary Clinton from Scranton Pennsylvania....and bill Clinton...from Arkansas are totally corrupt...
They have taken the democratic party out of the next two election cyclea.
..they sidelined Bernie sanders..

They pushed identity-racist politics....
And are so corrupt the fbi fave them a pass...

It ends today....hillary and Billy


Carpetbaggers are finished...

Amen.

Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on August 21, 2017, 09:47:45 PM
112993
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on September 04, 2017, 09:46:36 PM
114400

Here is hiliarys book in a nutshell...

Mostly its about Billy Jeff Clinton.


Although President Trump seems to be having such fun at the Clintons expense...and making them constantly lose face and credibility.


WHAT HAPPENED


Three four

 Wake up in the morning
 Clock says half past one
 I have no sunglasses
 As I step into the sun

 There's no recollection
 Of the evil things I've done
 My head feels like
 I must have had some fun

 What happened?

 Last thing I remember
 I was chillin' at a party
 Pinchin' girlie's asses
 I was drinkin' recklessly

 I know I did something
 Lord, what could it be?
 Woke up in the morning
 And all my friends hate me

 What happened?

 Oh yeah
 Play it for them wonder

 What am I doing here?
 Who is this girl in my bed?
 What is this *&^% on my face?
 My God, what is that awful smell?

 She may be an angel
 She may be a queen
 She might be Black, White, American, Indian or Japanese

 What happened?

 Threw a bottle at the bouncer
 Didn't think that he was cool
 Pissed in someones drink
 And threw a bike into a pool

 Drivin' down the side walk
 Like a drunkin' possessed fool
 I broke every single traffic rule

 Oh, what happened?
 What happened?
 Let's go

 She may be an angel
 She may be a queen
 She might be Black, White, American, Indian or Japanese


Sublime...isnt it?
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on September 08, 2017, 03:05:19 PM
114734





“You’re communicating on highly sensitive topics. Why wasn’t it more than a mistake? Why wasn’t it disqualifying?” Lauer, a longtime co-host of NBC's "Today Show" asked.






We know the answer.



Mrs Clinton fucxckxed up.
She will no longer hold elected office.
She will try to be added in to any political beast that arrives. But that political entity that allows her entry WILLz crumble.



So Billy Jeff? Hilliary Diane.

You both are dismissed.
You both are the Bernie madoffs of politics.....

Get used to it.

The violet elephant is taking both of you out of politics as of this moment.

Funds starting to dry up already.

Goodbye hill and bill
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on September 08, 2017, 03:08:19 PM
Hillary, um sweetheart, you were disqualified.

And, Hillary, you were rejected. For Donald Trump.
Live with it. Reality!!!!
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on September 30, 2017, 04:26:23 PM
116642
Wish u had that sense of urgency while u were watching the ISR feed during our 5th firefight in B-ghazi 😑or did u not consider us Americans?  …
11:49 PM - Sep 25, 2017
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on October 03, 2017, 08:07:51 AM
Hillary Clinton will do anything to try to appear relevant.

So glad she lost

Fuxcking idiot to even mention silencers and nra!!!!’

This is what happens when you tell people that republicans are an “enemy “....she is obsessed and fucxking out of her mind.

Time for reflection and prayer you dumb deaf stupid biaaaatch
Title: Re: POTUS
Post by: cinnamon synonym on October 07, 2017, 05:32:20 PM
117378

Harvey Weinstein and the Democrats tsk tsk

Live by the sword die by the sword.

I think we are going to get another 4 years of Donald trump as president.

Keep fucxking with the snowflakes heads. Say no to political correctness and racist bigoted identity politics!

I turned in my democrat registration card after the first World Trade Center explosions back in 1992 when Bill Clinton did nothing to shore up ports and borders. We knew the fundamentalists would return and billy bob Clinton did not.
No wonder his wife lost.