That speech was a classic. Vladamir Putin is the leader of the Alt-Right, couldn’t make this stuff up.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufkHt8dgG8I&feature=youtu.be
Very interesting article about the level of physical violence perpetrated by supporters of the two main candidates:
Amazing! All the sites I look at think Hillary’s speech was great,while Trump supporters didn’t like that it showed his links to the alt-right.
As for health, let’s check in with Trump’s doctor…
1 Like
P.S. Are we taking bets about how long his new “campaign manager” (no. 3) will last? The fact that he works at Breitbart was bad enough; now the latest news that he slaps women around and is an anti-Semite.
Apparently he now has kookoo Michelle Bachmann advising him on foreign policy.
All the real kooks are coming out on his side. KKK, Breitbart, Alex Jones, Bachmann… who’s next? Victoria Jackson?
You’re a funny guy. Of course all of the sites you look at think her speech was great. They’d think anything she did was great. That’s the lying and dying media for you though.
Here’s why her speech was a monumental tactical failure:
-
It involved incoherent rambling about Putin, Farage and Alex Jones, none of whom are alt-right. You do know that no one actually watches Alex Jones unironically, right? It sounded like she was the one with the conspiracy theories. She then went on to praise George Bush, who was formally Hitler, but is now a very respectable person, apparently. Bizarre.
-
She walked right into the trap set up by the alt-right. If the alt-right consists of a group of internet trolls, and you don’t feed the trolls, then mentioning the trolls by name immediately sends tons of people to their keyboards to type in “what is the alt-right?”, thus producing more internet trolls… The mood on the alt-right was positively jubilant about what a colossal mistake she made. Hillary Clinton just about broke Youtube with the LULZ produced.
-
That tone and those mannerisms. Related to the above, when you come off like a grumpy, shrill, hectoring, and frankly bossy, old school teacher who is completely out of touch, you immediately become the very embodiment of the establishment (plus of course, having establishment credentials with being the one who has turned several MENA nations into rubble, accepting bribes/campaign contributions from Wall Street, being elbow deep in a corruption scandal, etc.).
Further to this, she could barely fill a junior high school stadium for her speech, and despite stacking the seats with paid supporters, one still slipped through the vetting process.
That guy just about broke the Internet with the kekz that ensued. The point is that Hillary Clinton seriously screwed up in making this speech because she’s made the very thing she claims to be against look cool, transgressive, anti-establishment. She’s red faced and shouting degenerate whilst those other guys over there are dropping acid and watching Jimi Hendrix set a guitar on fire. All of this will outlive both Trump and Hillary. What a time to be alive!
1 Like
For me the fun is over, the entertainment is gone. Can’t even watch The Daily Show making fun of him anymore. I just want him to go away. Go back to your tower and your business failures. Reality TV that’s his platform, and he’s not even successful there.
Hate Hillary as much as you want, four years with her can’t be worse than four years with this incompetent, inexperienced, and lazy clown.
I can certainly relate to people that personally dislike Trump, and you are right that Hillary is the status quo candidate. But I would suggest it may well be worse under Clinton for the following reasons.
-
War hawk, her regime change policy has left the middle east in a mess. Her current positions regarding Russia are scary to say the least. Blaming them definitively for DNC hacks (when Comey has said it cant be proven), stating military force should be used in cases of cyber espionage and creating a no fly zone in Syria where the Russians are flying around to name a few.
-
Corruption, cronyism, pay for play will be rampant. At least in my opinion.
-
Corporate pandering at the expense of what is good for the people. TPP and so on.
-
I believe the Democrats have been agitating racial tensions for political leverage.
-
Media, especially with regards Google, Twitter and Facebook. All entities that have billions at stake in this election and thus manipulate searches, trends and posts to censor one candidate and promote another.
6 Financial stability. nearly 20 trillion dollars in debt the financial institutions are given free reign and already crashed the system once. Don’t forget it was the other Clinton who got rid of a large part of the Glass–Steagall Act (put in place after the previous great recession in the 30’s) and then finishes office and goes around the financial institutions making millions in speeches.
There’s more i could write, but I think you get the point.
1 Like
I get the point. Nobody likes Hillary. But at least you know what to expect. She won’t run America into the ground. There will be continuity and stability. Even in the worst case scenario she will not be a disaster to the US and the world.
With Trump, you don’t know what’s going to happen. He might not himself know yet what’s going to happen. As far as I can tell he’s highly unprepared for the job and it doesn’t look like he’s busy catching up with learning all the things he needs to know.
You’re reaching Mike. All of your points are easily debunked with a bit of intellectual rigor
The “nobody likes Hillary” thing is some clever marketing by the right, and some intellectual laziness on the left. In reality most “accept” her and support her. She’s solid. The emails, Benghazi, the so called cronyism and all that is just reaching
Topics like globalization are not debunked, there are arguments for increased globalization and arguments against it. Depending on who you are in the world those points will vary and depending on who you are the weight of the points made will vary also.
1 Like
Yes, we know what to expect. Re-read what Mick wrote. We know that Hillary will quite likely start at least one war or at least bomb several nations. We also know that she will be seriously gunning to start WW3 with at least Russia. We know that she will give her supporters on Wall Street a free hand until they blow the entire system up, at which point she will bail them out. We know that she will provide favours and access to her many other “donors” (what would be called bribery/corruption in the third world). We know that together with social media platforms she will clamp down heavily upon free speech and really begin putting the pieces in place for the next level of Big Brother. We know that she would import a new populace so as to secure her ilk a permanent ruling bloc. It’s hilarious that you think that none of this constitutes running America into the ground, or that it constitutes stability (though it does constitute continuity with the past several administrations, I’ll grant you that).
The worst case scenario is actually WW3. It is by no means a certainty, but it’s a relatively small risk with a very large outcome if it does eventuate. Trump wants better relations with Russia (amongst other nations). He also hasn’t indirectly created the new Caliphate and wreaked havoc upon Europe as a consequence. Hillary doesn’t want better relations with Russia, and she is quite happy – nay jubilant – to see several nations in both the Middle East and Europe take several steps closer to failed state status. One wants to move to turning the dial on the stove down, the other wants to crank it up to eleven. You’re seriously telling me that she’s better on this score alone?
Quick couple of questions:
- How many campaigns to turn nations into rubble has Trump run?
- How many “freedom fighters” turned jihadis has he funded?
Yes, we don’t know what’s going to happen with Trump. It is like playing Russian roulette with a revolver. The difference is that you get to spin the chamber. With Hillary, it’s like playing Russian roulette with a machine gun.
I know you’re using the old play book of Republicans want to bail out Wall Street and bomb some countries, but you might notice that the standard cardboard cut out isn’t running this year, so that doesn’t apply. The Democrats are the indisputable party of bombs and bribes now, though the GOPe is still clinging to its “former glories” in this regard.
If someone with an R after his name had the track record that Hillary has you’d be able to hear the whining from Forumosa at Trump Tower.
“Yes, we know what to expect.”
Based on what? Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, Alex Jones…? Or liberal media? I am confused.
Is she too hawkish, too weak, should she bomb more or less? What is it?
I don’t get Trump supporters. Trump doesn’t rule out the use of nukes, for crying out loud, and you are afraid of Hillary starting WW3?
One can be unnerved at the prospect of a Hillary Clinton OR a Donald Trump presidency at the same time.
Im not going to defend everything Trump says or does, I have never said I am a Trump supporter either, I do think Hillary Clinton is by far the worse of the two. That doesn’t translate to me hanging a picture of Donald Trump on my wall.
Although regarding nukes, there was as I recall one reporter pushing him to say he would never use nukes and trump replied along the lines of “I never remove options from the table”, the reporter went as far to ask him he would promise not to nuke France, to which Trump repeated the same. The media went nuts and reported “OMG OMG Trump might nuke France” even though two seconds latter he’s throwing up his hands at in a WTF kind of gesture and saying how on earth could that scenario even happen.
You and I see the same events and we may interpret them differently, which is all fine and dandy. I doubt (although I can’t say for sure) that Trump is going to make a beeline to nuke France the minute he got elected President. But you’re entitled to your interpretation too.
1 Like
I do think Hillary Clinton is by far the worse of the two
I like to listen to intelligent people in the know, left or right, it doesn’t matter. As far as I can tell, most intelligent people argue that Hillary Clinton is at the very least the better of two evils. There is just too much at stake to have a person like Trump run the show.
But I don’t think this election is about left vs right politics. The TPA, TPP, TTIP agreements were negotiated under both Bush and Obama, the powers that be would have loved nothing better than a Jeb Bush vs Hillary Clinton election, both of them would have represented their interests. It wouldn’t have mattered what the public voted wall street and the globalists would win.
The Republican elite are sitting this one out, Mitt Romney, Jeb Bush, Ted Cruz, John Kaisitch are all but batting for Hillary Clinton and not because they are butt hurt or out of some principled position they feel they need to take.
This was one of the first sites I saw going all in for trump, you may agree or disagree with their views, but one thing they are not is stupid. It even surprised me at first why they would support trump, but if you would like to read more from some Republicans who have become discouraged by the Republicans yet know all the names and plays politically, you might find it interesting. https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2016/08/20/presidential-politics-and-current-status-of-uniparty/
1 Like
How would we ever know what to expect?
Maybe looking at Hillary’s track record?
Maybe looking at her donors?
Maybe looking at her statements?
Nah, we couldn’t do that now, could we?
Also, that feeling when 1) someone on the internet thinks you watch Fox News, listen to Rush Limbaugh, or listen to Alex Jones (unironically), 2) someone on the internet thinks it’s still 2004 and that’s still an insult. Top kek.
“I like to listen to intelligent people in the know, left or right, it doesn’t matter. As far as I can tell, most intelligent people argue that Hillary Clinton is at the very least the better of two evils. There is just too much at stake to have a person like Trump run the show.”
Let’s try it this way and see how well this works:
“I like to listen to intelligent people in the know, left or right, it doesn’t matter. As far as I can tell, most intelligent people argue that Donald Trump is at the very least the better of two evils. There is just too much at stake to have a person like Hillary run the show.”
See what I did there? I tried to appear like I was engaging in a discussion of good faith by claiming I listen to all sides. I threw out a bone about left and right. Coincidentally, everyone intelligent, and therefore worth listening to, just happens to agree with me. Funny that. Also notice the complete appeal to authority (or “intelligence” actually) without actually addressing any of the counter-arguments made by people with “wrong” opinions (who are, obviously, not intelligent, since you only listen to intelligent people, and intelligent people all happen to share your opinions).
Standard liberal tactic. Not working very well on the internet as the role of lying and dying media as gatekeeper slips.
How quickly everyone has forgotten the Donald and his idiotic birther movement. Amuuuurica is one gawd dang helluva country ain’t she!