I never said it was okay. I never said I was right wing. I don't like propaganda. But I dislike propaganda based in lies more than propaganda based on truth. Disliking Trump for this is absolutely justified. Using that dislike as an excuse to vote for Hilary Clinton is absolutely not in my books. And the way I see it, Left and Right doesn't mean jack in 2016. Rationality needs to prevail, not the words Democrat or Republican.
Demon horns? I know the GOP are doing their best to hang Benghazi on Clinton but I will point out again that the GOP led committee, where a member admitted was out to damage Clinton, couldn't find any malfeasance on her part.
So rationally as a brown individual of Muslim background that has family that are Muslim foreign nationals overseas that want to visit us in the near future, why should I create a false equivalency between Trump and Hillary? Will Hillary prevent me from seeing my relatives? I can draw a direct tangible line to how Trump's rhetoric/policy desires will negatively affect my life. I can't find one with Hillary, not in such a direct manner at least. Call me selfish for voting for my own personal self-interest. I really don't care.
True I agree party loyalty shouldn't trump rationality. That said the winner of the election is going to be either a Democrat or a Republican. I often wish it wasn't so but that is where we are now. I can tell you this if Trump ran as a Democrat and was the nominee this year and the Republican nominee wasn't Ted Cruz. I would probably vote for the Republican.
I would vote for George W. Freaking Bush over Donald Trump in a heartbeat. This has nothing to do with partisan politics. This has everything to do with an egomaniacal narcissist who panders to white nationalists to garner support. A true fascist.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Do you think Putin will be going to The Miss Universe Pageant in November in Moscow - if so, will he become my new best friend?</p>— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/347191326112112640">June 19, 2013</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Considering how anti-NATO Trump is, that his advisers are all men with heavy ties to Russia, and Trump's admiration of Putin - you really have to begin to wonder what is going on here. Putin is clearly actively trying to help get Trump elected.
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ZxcAN0t6GrI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> Something you WON'T see on Clinton News Network
Well Durrrdeeduh. Just because a country can't vote doesn't mean they dont try to influence elections. This is nothing new and its not just an American thing.
Sponsored FB ad. Top comments are hilarious. Dumb, inbred, Trump supporters with no money. LMFAO. :grin::grin::grin:
Why won't the media ask Donald Trump the tough questions about his alleged ties to Vladimir Putin and Russia's attempts to influence our elections? Could this have something to do with why Trump suggested he wouldn't defend Baltic NATO members or why his campaign softened ant-Russian Republic party platform language on Ukraine? We're just asking the tough questions. I'm not saying that there's any connection here, I'm just asking. I've got people looking into it, trust me. The best people. And you're going to be shocked at what they find, believe me. Shocked. SAD!
Completely fair. I have no problem with who anybody votes for, if they have rationale reasons for doing so. Personally, I think Trump's stance on this issue is more rhetoric than policy, and he wouldn't be able to either get such a ban through Congress, or implemented. He does often use rhetoric to get other changes enacted, and I would expect that our immigration process would be vetted and improved. My daughter found an excellent sponsored debate where the Syrian immigration issue was discussed between two experts from each side, and I will say that the evidence presented indicating it isn't really a problem to do so was pretty strong. These are the same facts that would get presented to Trump were he elected, and they indicate that we already do a pretty good job vetting immigrants. I will try to post if I can get my daughter to tell me where she found it...google keeps coming up with 'debates' that are nothing more than political rhetoric
Are you against people finding out that one of our presidential candidates is manipulating the election process? I find it very telling when a person thinks that the TRUTH, no matter where it came from, is bad. If Trump is influencing Putin to tell the TRUTH about Hillary Clinton and the DNC when that truth is that they don't give a $hit about the American election process then good on Trump.(he is still an idiot and I won't vote for him)
Nothing showed that Hillary was manipulating anything. Hillary doesn't work at the DNC. As of yet there is no implication of Hillary conspiring with the DNC either. Personally, I don't care who exposed the corruption. Who exposed it doesn't change the corruption itself. It needed to be exposed. I would be concerned if Trump was working with Putin on anything. The idea is that politics are supposed to stop at the Water's edge. Furthermore Trump's pro Putin connections, policy ideas, and statements are a concern. At the same time none of that takes away from the wrongs the DNC has done.
If Donald Trump is working with Vladimir Putin, that concerns me much, much more than the DNC's support of Hillary Clinton,
Which is why that was the Clinton campaign's response. They want people thinking just exactly that, even though they have no evidence at all that it is true. Voters need to remember that you are puppets in the game, with others pulling the strings.
Well there is some evidence, though it is all circumstantial. It also isn't directly related to the DNC email hacks. The only part of the GOP platform Trump called to amend was parts that were critical of Russia attacking the Ukraine. There is the fact that Trump has publicly stated that under him the U.S. may not uphold its end of the bargain in the NATO alliance. There is the fact that a top Trump advisor has accepted millions of dollars from Rinat Akhmetov and was allied with Yanukovych who had to flee the Ukraine for Russia. Trump has publicly praised Putin. So to be concerned about a connection is a valid concern with or without the wikileaks. That being said, I agree that it is probably nothing more than a diversionary tactic to talk about that instead of dealing with corruption at the DNC.
Which is why my post was intended to be read in a Trump-esque, "where's the birth certificate" tone... oh well, hard to do online. In the end, this still does nothing to convince me that Donald Trump isn't an existential threat to our country.
Just gonna leave this here. <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Julian <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Assange?src=hash">#Assange</a>: Choosing Between Trump & Clinton is Like Picking Between Cholera & Gonorrhea <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/DNCLeak?src=hash">#DNCLeak</a> <a href="https://t.co/8GbtvDiu2l">https://t.co/8GbtvDiu2l</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/FeelTheBern?src=hash">#FeelTheBern</a></p>— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) <a href="https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/757638903574781953">July 25, 2016</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Speaking of gonorrhea; is he going to release any documents on his raping of two different women in Sweden?
