IMO she is a failed politician who would have never been elected to even the local city council if she had not been Bill Clinton's wife. She got elected to a state senate seat in a state she didn't live in because she was Bill Clinton's wife. Her time in those political positions did not result in positive actions for this country they resulted in scandal and typical Clinton related BS. Trump on the other hand is not Hillary Clinton... There should only one sign for each campaign... I'm Not Trump! and I'm Not Hillary! Actually that should be the box you check on the ballot.
That's funny. I disagree but it's funny. Hillary, to me, doesn't represent a threat to the country. If she's elected, we will all be here 4 years from now debating about the same crap doing about the same stuff living our same lives. Maybe we'll be mad at her for the way she handled something but nothing will be materially different for us commoners. Trump, to me, presents a clear danger. His long history shows that he burns things to the ground, just as he's doing with his campaign. ...and he does so only for his personal benefit. History is our guide. Your arguments against Clinton, not to be rude, sound rather superficial. The results of any of your arguments against Clinton don't result in bankruptcy or WWIII. I can't say the same for Trump.
You know, it's funny. In the past when people have made wild claims about presidents before or after they were elected (Clinton is a rapist, Bush is Hitler, Obama is a mooslim, blah blah blah...) I tend to block it out as static or extreme hyperbole used to demonize those we disagree with politically. You take it all with a grain of salt and always keep in mind who it's coming from. Ever since the 70's, you've heard people say "[insert Presidential candidate] is going to start World War III!" Of course, it's never been true. But for the first time ever...I think it could actually be true this time around, if you insert Donald Trump into that sentence. No hyperbole.
Oh please - Ronald Reagan was an actor - how many people got their places by starting off because they were a sports star (really makes one qualified) or an actor or a relative. Look at the Bushes. Clinton had a career outside her marriage to Bill. Did she benefit from being first lady? Of course. But so what, if you are going to knock her for that than how about knocking everyone else for it too?
Hillary's been handed this nomination and she has no idea what it means to work for success. She probably doesn't even own any boots, let alone the straps to go with.
Funny, I would have the opposite criticism of her -- that she has spent all of her time for the last decade working with a singular focus on this nomination at the expense of everything else. She became a senator to burnish her presidential credentials. She became Secretary of State to burnish her presidential credentials. She didn't take those jobs simply to serve her country, but because they were stepping stones to the presidency. The things she engaged in as First Lady were designed to position her for a presidential run. Even her speaking engagements and philanthropic efforts seem like they were geared for a presidential run. I'd say she has worked for 20 years on this nomination.
"Hillary Clinton accepted $58,000 in jewelry from the government of Brunei when she was Secretary of State – plus millions more for her foundation." Directly from his mouth today. It was clearly established that she has declared it as diplomatic gift right after trip as per protocol. See this is the problem. He keeps on repeating lies and incorrect statements. So at this point there no accurate way of separating information from misinformation when it comes to Mr. Trump Claims and news. It certainly is Sad
That's the thing is - he doesn't care if it's true or not. What's amazing is how his fan-boys back him up and just ignore the fact that he is the biggest liar to ever step into American politics.
Correct. In fact, his entire speech was filled with lies (Fortune Magazine): http://fortune.com/2016/06/22/donald-trumps-latest-distortions-on-hillary-clinton/ And this NYT article suggests that Trump supporters don't believe what he says or possibly don't recognize his mistakes and misstatements: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/23/upshot/dont-assume-donald-trumps-supporters-believe-his-promises.html
Nah they don't. A lot of Trump supporters just blindly follow him because they are Xenophobic and he's the only candidate in a long while to promise to make america white again...oops. I meant Great. For them this is really all its about. Getting Mexicans and Muslims out of America. None of that other stuff matters. They know they are never getting another candidate this openly xenophobic so desperately latch on to him.
I'm not knocking her for those things I'm just sick of hearing how qualified she is. Like you said Reagan was a an actor, so what? She is running against Trump so it doesn't really matter anyway. I will say this, she has spent a lot of time chasing this job so I have to give her credit for her tenacity.
Lol yes, in this case it is. Trump isn't talking about illegal immigrants, he's talking about Mexican immigrants. He has made that very very clear over the months. He's shown 0 empathy towards them. And he's completely fine with immigration from Europe curiously. Then you think...well maybe the guy just hates illegal immigration. Which is un-american if you ask me but that's another discussion... But "It's just about illegal immigration." is not an argument to make for Trump. Why? Because he then takes it further and says Muslims aren't invited...period. Legally, illegally. Period. If you think this isn't Xenophobia then what is it? If you know these things and still support Trump then excuse me for believing that you too are a bit terrified of "The Other" and since Trump flip flops on nearly every issue but this it's pretty clear this is a big reason his base clings on to him. Good luck finding another candidate right or left to say the xenophobic things he's said.
I want to point out, as I had before, any of the arguments cast against Clinton almost always directly apply to Trump. Trump was given a $1mm loan by his daddy. Then his dad bailed Trump out on multiple occasions (once illegally and was rejected by the NJ Casino board). Trump also received a massive inheritance. So Trump would be a nobody without his family $ (and support). You can't knock Clinton for riding on coat tails without also acknowledging Trump did the same.
Trump has married two immigrants, golfs in Scotland, and has foreign investors/investments. I'd hardly call him "xenophobic". Edit: his mother was born in Scotland.
