DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Everything Else... Election Thread #12: The Final Countdown

That has everything to do with Trump and the election.

just because you can't(or refuse) see the correlations doesn't mean it isn't there.

As i said before, people always say when they get rich, they are gonna say and do whatever they want.

Well, this is what that looks like, apparently.

Hillary labels half the country as deplorables and basement dwellers, yet claims she will be a uniter...

Remember that Hillary has stated she has a public position and a private position. Her public position is to say anything that will get the liberal sheep to vote for her. No matter how extreme the lie. Her private position is to be beholden to wallstreet and foreign countries that line her pockets. She cares very little for the common man.

But the liberal sheep put their hooves in their ears squealing bah bah baaaaah instead of seeing her for the two faced puppet liar she is.

Nah, I think you are attaching too many of the world's problems to a candidate and the great majority of those were a stretch.

You want Hillary to win, right? Let's put it this way-- you are probably going to get your wish. If Hillary does indeed win, then a few years from now when none of us are talking about Trump, you will see that all of those problems.... are still going to be there. And some might actually get worse (I hope not.)

One more comment on this: Trump was actually fairly restrained, for the most part, in August and September of this year. It went along with the whole 'need to be Presidential' and all that. I realize there were some mini-controversies and such but if you compare what he was saying during that time compared to what he said a year ago, it's really not even in the same ballpark.

Or compare his first debate to the second debate. He sounded really bad in the first debate because he was given a faulty mic and he rudely talked over the moderator a bunch of times, but as far as 'slinging mud'... it was mainly Hillary doing that. After the VP debate, the Billy Busy tapes, some Republicans withdrawing support, etc. things are probably going to get nasty. There will probably be more October surprises that make both sides look even worse and maybe a few months from now we can all be embarrassed by what a mess this election turned into.

You have your angle, I have mine.

I'm not voting for either of these creatures, but to say that voting for Trump is promoting the rape culture and not including Hillary in that category is as lame as it gets.

Sorry, we've all known for years that Bill was a slug, and that his wife enabled his actions and we all know that she ran his victims through the mud.

So how is voting for her any different than voting for him?

And please, don't hide behind the 'he was never convicted' crap. That's as lame an excuse as giving a sports hero a pass just because they settled out of court.

It's often been said that the presidential election reflects the character of the nation.

Citizens on both sides of the aisle screwed the pooch hard this time.

Has anyone mentioned this?

Kinda funny, I hear Beck talk quite a bit about how Trump is Putins favorite candidate, but why is it that Hillary allowed all that uranium to be put under the control of Putin?

Donations to the Clinton foundation? Really?

Way to go lefties. You're favorite people sold us down the river.

Hillary didn't rape anybody.

Hillary didn't sexually assault anybody.

Hillary wasn't accused of any of that.

Hillary didn't have a conversation that implied sexually is ok because of status.

You're refusal to understand that is why your ideology won't be sniffing the White House anytime soon.

You and others can Continue acting confused about it all you want. It's not doing conservatism any favors in convincing the majority of American people that your ideology is the correct one.

Which is the entire point of the election.

Nobody is fooled by your imaginary high horse.

Here's the solution: put up a good candidate. Hell, put up an AVERAGE candidate.

And you couldn't even do that. You gotta fix your ideology and people who represent you before worrying about liberals.

Did you really just ignore the entire point of my post? So she didn't rape anybody, she still enabled him to do so and you're just going to pass on that?

You're what's confusing. This election isn't confusing me at all.

Hey Swish,
I see you are still at it!!.. Naw, the Repubs dont get it. They could have won the white house but of course, their crazy faction of the party screwed up again!!!

Now you have a "pervert" running for Pres!! Man, how desperate do they have to be??? SMH!!!..But then again, Trump, I mean Pervert has had all this info out on him. It was bound to come out.. and it was even in his books!!..

What blows my mind is this didn't even have to come out. Why people on my side of the aisle thought this creature would be a good candidate is...well, confusing.

I find it funny how no Republican has commented on the fact that Trump raped a 12 year old and then told her to have an abortion.

WELL Mr.Ted,
Since we are on a Browns Board, I will make this analogy.. the repubs had BETTER DRAFT PICKS in front of them, but chose their "Johnny Manziel"!!

If you all don't win, it is the repubs fault, this race could have been over with the right pick!

Well put my friend, well put.

I haven't commented on it because it's an ongoing thing that has popped in and out of the courts over the last few months.

But I swear it wouldn't surprise me at all.

They who really make decisions for America - I don't know them personally lol - won't let either one of these candidates truly be in charge.
Good luck dawgs.

We're sinking, could you toss us an anchor please?

The same reason no liberal comments on Hillary's criminal acts. They're both crooked liars that will do or say anything to meet their own selfish needs with total disregard for the concerns of others.

Haus, I really have to give you some truly deep respect. You've worked your tail off for this guy in these threads. If you and I were friends from high school, we'd still be super-tight, because I value loyalty above almost everything else. I just turned 60 2 weeks ago, and my best friends have been with me for more than 40 of those years.

Tonight, I'm going to ask you to take just one step back... and look at it from that exact point of view: high school and college.

We all have (or had) that one guy in the crew who made every other one of us cringe on a regular basis when he opened his mouth. At the school dance. In the stands of an away football game. In the night club, when you now had to fight your way out of a ruined evening, because he insulted the bouncer's girlfriend- in front of him. That one guy who always kept things interesting, but at a huge price to the friends who tolerated him.

IMO, Trump is that one guy- for the GOP and all the reasonable Republican people who wanted to ride with their party's nominee to the end. And he's now been The Face of their entire Krew for more than a year.

Die hard Trump supporters are now calling GOP leaders who have distanced themselves/completely renounced Donald Trump as 'gutless wonders,' self-serving wimps' and 'political hacks,' while Their Boy continues to embarrass The Krew, tarnish The Brand- and alienate even the most casual of uninformed/uninvolved U.S. voters.

________________

When I was in my early 20's, My Personal Krew finally ditched 'our resident azzhat,' one-by-one. The toll he took on our good times became too much for almost all of us to bear. I was the first to draw a line in the sand:

"Clem... we're bustin' all up into T's Club tonight! Zapp is in town! Honeys are gonna be READY! It's THE party, you know?"
"Who's comin'?"
"Everyone."
"Blaze?"
"Well... yeah- him too...."
"Sorry- pass."
"Aw, man... it won't be the same without 'Captain Caramel,' You're 'The Golden Boy'- you're the Honey Magnet- Sisters, White girls..."
"Pass. If he's there, I'mma be somewhere else. Can't do it. Won't do it."
"Damn, man. Dude.... it's ZAPP!!!" (Haus- nothing was more guaranteed to get Honeys out on the dance floor back then- and we were in our early 20's! Get my point?)
"Sorry. I can't do it any more. It's him or me."
"[crap]. I get it... you gotta be you."

I hated 'Blaze' the day he was introduced to The Krew. He represented everything I was trying to NOT be. Loud, stupid, opinionated, allergic to facts... I waited too long to say anything about him, and by then, he was fully integrated into the group. So I made my stand. One by one, we peeled off from The Krew, until he dropped out of sight. We all went our separate ways. I got married. Others did, too. Some of us later reconnected, but we were never the same. It was like chemotherapy within a social group. I had to poison us to save us. I've never regretted the move, because most of us are still together.

I see the GOP at the same crossroads that My Krew found ourselves at, 40 years ago. Donald Trump is the metastasis that the GOP allowed to grow within their own body, because noone had the guts to put a halt to his cancerous azz when they had the chance.

And then yesterday, you write this to Swish:

_______________



Do you even hear yourself any more?


Haus, My Dawg.... THIS is exactly what My Krew sounded like when I drew my line in the sand over Blaze, back in the late '70's/early '80's. They tried to legitimize him. They tried to downplay his excesses. They made endless excuses for him, like a bunch of abused enablers. They KILLED themselves trying to keep The Krew alive with Blaze in it... and they only succeeded in killing The Krew as it once was. I haven't seen Blaze since 1981. I'll never forgive him for derailing the best Party Train that a young, 'hip' guy cold have ridden. And I'm still not fb friends with the two 'hangers on' who brought him to us in the first place, and stayed with him the longest.

Responsible Republicans of every stripe are running from this ill-equipped, uninformed, intellectual lightweight with all the speed they can muster... and I don't blame them. Why are you still hanging on?

They've all reached that "Him or me" point like I did- and I completely understand. They want to save their careers. They want to save their professional reputations. They want to save Their Krew. They simply CANNOT allow their names to be attached to this man any longer.


I need you to tell me, Haus:
Is there NO line this guy could cross that would put you off his team? What must you learn about this guy that would FORCE you to do what I did with some of the best friends I ever made? Is there NO line he can cross that wouldn't force you to choke down every human standard of decency you ever had in support of him?


This repugnant piece of Human Effluent found a scam artist's path to weasel himself to the very top of a US major political party's presidential ticket... and that scares the ever-lovin' [crap] out of me.


Because if Good Americans like you are OK with guys like him....
...It means the end of Good Americans like me.


I already drew my line in the sand, 40 years ago- with personal friends whom I saw every day. That line is now etched in concrete for people like Donald Trump. I don't like'em. I don't respect'em. I'll do everything I can to resist'em and defeat them in anything they want for My Country.

Where is your line, when it comes to this level of outrageous 'presidential' behavior?

__________________

Yesterday, you expressed sincere disappointment in me for 'not reaching the bar' you'd come to expect from me. I'll now ask this of you:

Where is the bar you set for Donald Trump?
Where is the bar that you set for yourself?

Your sincere, honest answer will tell me all I need to know about the validity and weight of your personal opinion about me. It will also set the bar for how I assess you.

This 'conversation' is a two-way street.
You're on trial, every bit as much as I am. Keep that in mind.

Thanks in advance,
Clem.

She enabled him? So she told bill "hey, go do your thing, it's all good".

Please.

You guys aren't making the argument you think you are.

Why not? You and others have CLEARLY decided that accusations = proof of guilt on this board.

So either admit that trump is guilty of child rape, or confess that you will look past it simply because you're biased and have no standards.

At least I'm trying to defend a WOMAN who did none of those things.

Trump is right: he could shoot somebody in the middle of the street, and you guys would still vote or defend him.

You don't even realize that you're proving his points you're doing it right now.

Haus loves posting emails, but he won't post this one.


In leaked email, Clinton claims Saudi and Qatari governments fund ISIS

https://www.yahoo.com/news/in-leaked-ema...-221758254.html

The Clinton campaign today tried to tamp down a mounting controversy over a newly disclosed, and potentially explosive, email in which the former secretary of state appeared to accuse the Saudi and Qatari governments of secretly funding the Islamic State.

On Aug. 17, 2014 — eight months before she declared her candidacy for president — Clinton sent a detailed strategy for combating the Islamic State, which she referred to as ISIL, in an email to John Podesta, then a White House counselor and now her campaign chairman.

Along with a military campaign to roll back the terror group in Iraq, the Clinton email talks about confronting the Saudis and the Qataris, both key U.S. allies, over what she refers to as governmental backing of ISIL.

The Clinton email states: “We need to use our diplomatic and more traditional intelligence assets to bring pressure on the governments of Qatar and Saudi Arabia, which are providing clandestine financial and logistic support to ISIL and other radical Sunni groups in the region.”

As a basis for the assertions, Clinton in the email cites “Western intelligence, U.S. intelligence and sources in the region.” The email was among thousands hacked from Podesta’s private Gmail account and released this week by WikiLeaks in what appears to be an attempt to embarrass the Clinton campaign. The campaign has struggled to respond to the contents of the emails, insisting it does not want to authenticate material that it and the U.S. government now believe came from a Russian state-sponsored cyberattack. The campaign would not say whether Clinton personally wrote the email, which reads like a position or policy paper, although it was sent from her private email account.

“These are hacked, stolen documents by the Russian government, which has weaponized WikiLeaks to help elect Donald Trump,” Glen Caplin, a senior Clinton campaign spokesman, told Yahoo News. “We’re not going to confirm the authenticity of any specific alleged communication.”

At the same time, a campaign aide also argued that the sentiment expressed in the email “isn’t new.” Clinton “has repeatedly called out the Saudis and Qataris for supporting terrorism,” said the aide, declining to be named. As evidence, the aide pointed to Clinton’s remarks in a speech last November. “And, once and for all, the Saudis, the Qataris, and others need to stop their citizens from directly funding extremist organizations, as well as schools and mosques around the world that have set too many young people on a path toward radicalization,” she said then.

In yet another instance cited by the aide, Clinton asserted in a September 2015 speech at the Brookings Institution that “nobody can deny that much of the extremism in the world today is a direct result of policies and funding undertaken by the Saudi government and individuals. We would be foolish not to recognize that. “

But in that and other remarks, Clinton appeared to be referring to general Saudi support for Islamic mosques that have been accused of spreading extremist ideology while calling out its government for not cracking down on private citizens sending money to terror organizations. In her email to Podesta, she goes beyond this, saying the Saudi and Qatari governments themselves are funding ISIS — a far more serious allegation with potentially more dramatic diplomatic implications. And one that has riled up critics of Saudi Arabia here in the U.S.

“Clearly, this Clinton email shows the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is continuing to covertly fund and logically support terrorist groups that kill Americans,” said Kristen Breitweiser, one of the leaders of the 9/11 family members who have been lobbying for recently enacted legislation — opposed by the Obama administration — that would allow them to sue the Saudis in federal court over their support for al-Qaeda. “Apparently, everybody in Washington knows that the Saudis are doing this, yet the White House and the State Department are against holding them accountable.”

Breitweiser added about the contents of the email: “This is a clear example of the difference between how people speak to each other privately compared to what they say publicly.”

Clinton broke with Obama over the legislation Breitweiser lobbied for; her campaign said she would have signed the bill allowing U.S. citizens to sue countries that sponsored terrorism into law.

The Saudi government, through Qorvis Communications, one of its lobbying and public relations firms, responded to questions about the email Tuesday, saying it would not comment on “leaked documents,” but adding that the allegations of government funding are “preposterous and simply defy logic.”

“Saudi Arabia is on the forefront of fighting terrorism in the region and around the world,” the Saudi statement said. “Daesh (an Arabic term for the Islamic State) is a sworn enemy of Saudi Arabia. It has called for the overthrow of the Saudi government and made the gulf kingdom its main target because it is the birthplace of Islam and home to the Two Holy Mosques.”

Noting the military and other actions the Saudi government has taken to fight the Islamic State — including “an aggressive public education and ideological campaign” to discredit the group, the Saudi statement added: “Saudi Arabia has long-maintained that it will thoroughly investigate any reports of funding of terrorist organizations by Saudi citizens or institutions.”

It’s unclear if Clinton actually wrote the email herself or was simply passing along a policy paper that was written by an aide or some other source. The lengthy document is in many respects unlike any of the mostly terse emails from her private email account that have been made public by the State Department. (Some former top U.S. national security experts last week warned that the Russians may seek to “doctor” leaked material, but the Clinton campaign has yet to offer evidence that any of the WikiLeaks emails were forged or tampered with.) And the rest of the positions outlined in the email — such as stepped-up air campaign and arming the Kurds — match closely with Clinton’s publicly stated positions on how to fight ISIS.

Still, the email goes much further than Clinton or President Barack Obama have before in publicly pointing a finger at U.S. allies for funding ISIS. But it does appear to reflect views that have been shared privately by some in the White House. A few months after Clinton sent this email, Vice President Joe Biden was forced to apologize for similar remarks. He told a group of students at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government that “our allies” contributed to the rise of ISIS.

“The Turks… the Saudis, the Emirates, etc., what were they doing? They were so determined to take down [Syrian President Bashar] Assad and essentially have a proxy Sunni-Shia war, what did they do? They poured hundreds of millions of dollars and tens, thousands of tons of weapons into anyone who would fight against Assad,” Biden said then. (Asked about the content of the Clinton email, White House spokesman Edward Price said: “We’ll decline to comment on purportedly leaked emails.”)

Clinton sent the email to Podesta when he still worked for Obama as counselor. He became Clinton’s campaign chair in January of 2015. Adding to the potential awkwardness for her campaign, Podesta’s brother, Tony Podesta, runs one of Washington’s biggest lobbying firms, which in September 2015 signed a contract to lobby for the Saudi government.

A few weeks later, Tony Podesta held a Clinton campaign fundraiser, attended by John Podesta, and has since been listed as one of the campaign’s chief “bundlers” or premier fundraisers. The Clinton campaign did not return a request for comment about whether the candidate believes it is appropriate to accept campaign donations from someone who has lobbied for a government she believes is sponsoring terrorism. Podesta also did not respond to a request for comment.

__________________

I've been saying this for years. Unfortunate this is the Middle East, not Europe. You have to play the game with these countries if we plan on having ANY sort of presence in the Middle East. And you have to remain friendly with the guys who control the oil prices, as of now, until we become even more energy independent.

Yes, please Election Day, hurry up and get here, so all these alt-right people can go back to the caves where they belong.

Poll analysis: Trump victory all but impossible based on previous races

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/poll-analysis-trump-victory-impossible-170313181.html

With just 28 days left to the presidential election, this race will soon be decided. Based on the polling patterns in recent presidential campaigns, it may already be over.

Rocked by the release of taped remarks degrading women and battered by mass defections from his own party, Donald Trump is now suffering a drop in national public opinion polls as Hillary Clinton pulls ahead.

As of Tuesday, Clinton leads Trump by 6.5 percentage points, based on an average of national polls tracked by Real Clear Politics. That gap may be all but impossible to close by Nov. 8, when voters go to the polls.

At this point in the 2012 election, President Barack Obama lead rival Mitt Romney by just 0.7 of a point, but went on to win by 5 million votes and 332 of the 538 electoral votes. In 2004, Democrat John Kerry was within 1.6 points of then-President George W. Bush, who won with a 3 million vote lead and 286 of the 538 electoral votes.

This year's poll gap is more like the 2008 race between Sen. John McCain and Obama, who was up by 5.5 percentage points 28 days before the election. Obama went on to win by nearly 10 million votes and outpolled McCain's electoral vote count by more than 2 to 1.

As in past races, poll numbers tend to swing frequently early in a presidential race. But results from the last three presidential campaigns also show that that voter preferences tend to solidify once the election is less than 30 days away.

Trump's numbers surged after the Republican convention in July, briefly overtaking Clinton by about a percentage point. But the surge faded as the Democrats took the stage with their convention a week later. The Trump campaign narrowed Clinton's lead back to within the margin of error in late September. Both candidates picked up support earlier this month as undecided voters began committing themselves.

But the poll margin began widening on Oct. 3, days before the publication of Trump's taped comments about groping women.

Since then, the gap in poll results has widened markedly.

Always love your posts Honey Magnet

I have very little respect for those Republicans denouncing Trump. Not because of lack of loyalty, but rather lack of conviction. Those denouncing Trump are doing so because they never wanted to endorse him in the 1st place. But they were too weenie to stand their ground and caved in to support him because he was a Republican.

My party made a bad decision that I disagree with. I know it is stupid buuut.... I'm going to support it anyway because my party made that decision.

This is not what I want from my elected officials (from either party). They are elected by the people, for the people. Not for the party. I want my senator, representative, etc to represent me. Not the party. Do what is best for their constituents.

That is what is missing from politics. I want my elected official to do what they feel is best for the people they represent, not blindly follow the agenda of their party.

These politicians jumping ship knew that electing Trump was a bad idea but were too weak to say/do anything about it. But they backed a bad decision because the party told them too. Now the party is telling them it okay to drop their support and they are. But they aren't dropping it because it's the right thing to do. They are dropping it because it's the right thing to do to get elected/re-elected.

Not the type of person I want to represent me in Congress.

I still say Trump wins. Here's why:

Millennials are not going to significantly vote for either candidate.

Women are not going to blindly back Hillary even after Trump's remarks, so that vote might favor Hillary but I don't think it will be that extreme.

Blacks, Latinos and other minority groups will mostly back Hillary but again not all are sold on her so maybe not a significant margin.

Trumps hardcore followers will never abandon him and their votes counterbalance the advantages Hillary has with women and minorities when you take into consideration that she is also hated. Third party votes, and not voting for a presidential candidate or at all will decide this race.

Trumps ace in the hole. White people who denounce him in public but inside still feel very much aligned with his messages, hate Obama and Hillary, or who just want to screw Washington. Nobody knows who you are voting for inside the voting booth.

This is what I fear right here. These people are out there, trust me and there are a lot of them. Trump's Judas vote.

I think they are out there but, I also think this perspective depends on where you live. Here in the cities along on the west coast you scratch your head wondering how the hell Trump can win this election. Nobody supports him here. Now, get out into the rural farm, ranching, timber areas and yes, you will find his support. But, the population is in the cities and that is what swings the states.

I suspect the same for Boston down to DC. The industrial Great Lakes region of the Midwest: Oh/MI/WI/MN/Il/In are different than the bread box farming areas of Kansas/Nebraska, Dakotas, Oklahoma. Add to it....Colorado, NC, VA, Pennsylvania and Nevada will be interesting to watch as they could go either way. I really don't know what to expect but, my personal feeling is: if the white liberals vote en masse plus, middle of the road Dems, women, minorities and the 18-24 year olds then Trump will be silenced once and for all and it could be a huge victory for HRC.

But, you are correct that Trump's staunch supporters will turn out to vote and if some people decide to stay home, as they did for Brexit, then it makes this election A LOT closer.

Not to worry, I'm sure Clinton's team will be busing their people to multiple polling places to cast votes.

sigh....

Maine governor wants ‘authoritarian power’ from Trump

https://www.yahoo.com/news/maine-governor-wants-authoritarian-power-from-trump-195354810.html

Clem, I appreciate the kind words about loyalty and working my tail off for Trump. The truth is that I mostly post in these threads in a lighthearted/fun sort of way although it probably does not show through in the posts as it does for say 40. That is a guy who is having a good time in here.

There are times where things get frustrating and it feels like work but that is in the minority of cases for sure. The political banter can be fun and at the end of the day, nobody should get too upset from having debates on the internet. On a more serious note, I strongly disagree with the direction that Hillary intends to take our great nation, so it's something I feel completely morally justified in doing as well.

Trump does have his fault as we all do, his policy has its faults as is the case with all politicians (or maybe my ideas are just faulty!), but my personal opinion is he would make a far better President and Commander-in-Chief than Hillary would, for a variety of reasons.

On that one guy: We all know a guy or three like that and I too have had to make tough decisions in terms of who I wanted to hang out with and, in general, be in my life. I bet none of them were successful enough to become a billionaire or to garner the most votes in Republican primary history, though. It's funny, that almost all of these nasty things about Trump only surfaced in the last year or so, after he was a serious candidate for the presidency. Maybe that says more about our political climate than it does about Trump (and I will concede that he has said some crazy ish along the way to help fuel that.)

I do think the GOP leaders who are distancing themselves one month before a winnable election, after an 11 year old audio recording was released (however distasteful it may have been), are a bunch of cowards. probably best to leave it at that.

Correction: that quoted block was in response to PDX and I think it was reasonable discussion from both of us.

As far as what is my line in the sand? Well I'll tell you this much: it's not an edited 11 year old tape where he claims to have made a move on a married chick and then says that stars can do [grossly inappropriate things]. I found that very distasteful, I do not condone that crap, and I'm not sure what else to write about that. It's not going to change my vote for President. It would take something very unforeseen (keeping in mind I expect more nasty things to come out against both candidates) and spectacular.

You have to understand that I think Donald Trump will lead to a more successful, more prosperous, safer, and better America for the large majority of our citizens. That is my rather strong opinion. I am not going to let some personal scandal get in the way of that unless it changes my opinion on who I think is the better leader for The United States of America.

I do respect you Clem. I always have respected you on this board and I still do. You are one of the few who I respect so much that I would think that you are above the political mud slinging, the petty name calling, and vitriolic posts. However it appears that this election cycle has gotten to you, as it has gotten to me as well. There are posts on here that I'd like to have back as they contain a sense of hostility that I would not have in just about any other discussion. Maybe that's something that you, I, and everyone else on here can keep in mind. We're all human, we all want what's best for society (and ourselves and those closest to us) and we merely have different ideas on how to get there.

Nothing wrong with that. Help the public vote. Here in Oregon we vote by mail. So easy, you have a few weeks with your ballot and the book that accompanies it with all the candidates and the measures so you can leisurely vote on a weekend morning while drinking your coffee. You then drop it off at several locations or you can pop it into the mail. Anyway to increase voter turn-out has to be a good thing!

Anyway, it's better than the Republican ploy of putting few polling place in the inner cities making it almost impossible for some to get to and creating ridiculously long lines.

Lol, wait a second. This email was released yesterday, right? Cut me some slack!

Also it is interesting to note how you worded that, "Haus loves posting emails, but he won't post this one." as if it absolves Hillary of responsibility.

So Hillary plainly acknowledges that groups in Saudi Arabia are sponsoring ISIL. Perhaps further background is needed and you can piece together the rest: The Saudi Arabian government made a huge donation to the Clinton Foundation, and Hillary approved a massive arms deal to the Saudi government.

There are a lot of implications in all this in regards to who is sponsoring who, where those arms ended up, 'pay for play', etc. It's a mess trying to sort everything out.

i was just pulling your string bro lol.

but yea it's why i posted it because i knew you would know why it's interesting.

she just slammed one of her top campaign donors.

i understand that technically those two situations can be separated, but in the realm of politics...eh...probably not.

there's so many different perspectives and situations that can explain or demonize this. at this point it's anyone's guess as to which angle is the correct or incorrect one.

Yeah, that last part is a good point. There are a lot of possible interpretations, from ones that are extremely shady to just regular, ordinary business. (This is assuming that there is a distinction between those two interpretations and for now, let's say that there is.)

That was the exact train of thought when W was elected twice. I agree with OCD, a lot of people are going to vote for Trump and not admit it.

If you can't respond to me coherently, please wait until you're sober.

Do you not recall that I have never been a Trump supporter? Did you not read what I said about how it wouldn't surprise me at all? Obviously not.

Do you not see how far you have to reach to support Hillary? At least
I'm not even trying to support Trump.

If Trump supporters are enablers of sexual assault for still supporting him after last weekend, you Hillary supporters are enablers of the enabler.

There's no difference.

Yep. BAAAAA! where's my shepherd?

I dont have to reach to defend Hillary.

Everybody knows i'm voting for her. As far as i'm concerned, i already have my reasons to vote for her without even mentioning Trump.

however, Trump makes that decision 1000x easier.

Donald Trump Campaign Manager Kellyanne Conway Berates 'Wishy-Washy' Republican Leaders

https://gma.yahoo.com/donald-trump-campa...topstories.html

Donald Trump campaign manager Kellyanne Conway today denounced some top Republican leaders for being "very wishy-washy" in their support of the GOP presidential nominee, after House Speaker Paul Ryan said he will no longer defend or campaign for Trump.

“We want the support of anybody who’s going to publicly endorse us. But enough of the pussyfooting around in terms of, you know, do you support us or do you not support us," Conway said today on ABC News’ "Good Morning America." "Some of these leaders have been very wishy-washy.”

Trump's support from his own party has wavered since a 2005 videotape surfaced last week in which the real estate developer can be heard making lewd comments about women. A number of Republican politicians have come out against Trump since the tape, first obtained by The Washington Post, was released Friday.

Ryan said he was not rescinding his endorsement of Trump but told fellow House Republicans in a conference call Monday that they should handle the candidate however they think it will most benefit their own races.

Donald Trump Slams Clinton For WikiLeaks Emails
Donald Trump Leaves Republican Party in TurmoilPlay videoDonald Trump Leaves Republican Party in Turmoil
NJ Gov. Chris Christie Slams Donald Trump's 2005 Remarks About Women as 'Completely Indefensible'
Trump has since embarked on a Twitter tirade, taking aim at the House speaker and other "disloyal" Republican leaders. Trump called Ryan a "weak and ineffective leader."

When asked this morning whether Trump would want Ryan to be speaker of the House of Representatives if he wins the presidential election, Conway said, "Well, that's up to the members of the Congress."

Conway defended Trump's attacks, saying his campaign has been "playing very nicely with members of the party."

"It's going to help him just take his message directly to the voters," she said on "GMA" this morning.

Donald Trump Unleashes Attack on Paul RyanPlay videoDonald Trump Unleashes Attack on Paul Ryan

and for all those trying to somehow pin Hillary on the issues with Bill:



Wow, even Fox news people are saying the same thing i'm saying. What wife wouldn't stand by her husband, especially with no proof?