View Poll Results: Who is the best vote?

Voters
56. You may not vote on this poll
  • Jeb Bush

    2 3.57%
  • Ben Carson

    1 1.79%
  • Chris Christie

    0 0%
  • Ted Cruz

    4 7.14%
  • Carly Fiorina

    1 1.79%
  • Jim Gilmore

    0 0%
  • Lindsey Graham

    0 0%
  • Mike Huckabee

    1 1.79%
  • Bobby Jindal

    1 1.79%
  • John Kasich

    0 0%
  • George Pataki

    0 0%
  • Rand Paul

    1 1.79%
  • Marco Rubio

    0 0%
  • Rick Santorum

    0 0%
  • Donald Trump

    13 23.21%
  • Hillary Clinton

    7 12.50%
  • Martin OMalley

    1 1.79%
  • Bernie Sanders

    24 42.86%
  • Other - Independent

    0 0%
  • Other - Green

    2 3.57%
  • Other - Libertarian

    2 3.57%
  • Other - Other

    0 0%
  • Suck it

    11 19.64%
  • I made an extra option

    2 3.57%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 8 of 22 FirstFirst ... 45678910111218 ... LastLast
Results 281 to 320 of 850

Thread: 2016 US Election

  1. #281
    SongOfSapphire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    517
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lungs View Post
    I regret the cliche hitIer comparison, but this is too apt.

    Yeah...

    Also, let's say Clinton wins this election. Well, what then? Assuming Trump's most loyal nuts (I am NOT saying all Trump's supporters are nuts, but many certainly are, as evidenced by their oft-quoted "I'm ready for a revolution!" declarations) don't stage a coup...well, what about 2020? I can think of a lot of possibilities. Will there be an even worse candidate than Trump? Will Ryan get in and try to right his party's ship? Will the Republican party split bt the mainstreams and the extremists? It'll be (morbidly) interesting to see what happens.
    "In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is." - Yogi Berra

  2. #282
    replica's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    TIM
    IEI 4w5
    Posts
    89
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SongOfSapphire View Post
    Like many people, I still think they're both awful. That said, I expect Trump is going to lose, possibly badly, and many of his supporters may lose their minds as a result.
    I'm not so sure. Remember when they said Brexit had a 80% chance of losing?

    The majority of the electorate is happy not with the direction of the country. There's still a 15-20% undecided chunk of the electorate. That's an all time record this late in the race. These are people that know who Clinton is, and don't want her. And they're looking for an excuse to give Trump a shot.

  3. #283
    Raver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    TIM
    Ne-IEE 6w7 sp/sx
    Posts
    4,899
    Mentioned
    221 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    “We cannot change the cards we are dealt, just how we play the hand.” Randy Pausch

    Ne-IEE
    6w7 sp/sx
    6w7-9w1-4w5

  4. #284
    Kill4Me's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    TIM
    SLE-Ti 8w7 so/sp
    Posts
    2,641
    Mentioned
    270 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Hillary Clinton just got pulverized in the third debate. Anybody that says she won did not watch. All she did was give canned responses, talk around everything and sounded super scripted, mechanical, like a talking robot. So monotonous....Total manipulator and 30+ thousand missing emails, give me a break. Nearly her entire life she rode bill's coattails.

  5. #285
    Kim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    TIM
    IEE e7 783 sx so
    Posts
    7,018
    Mentioned
    423 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kill4Me View Post
    Hillary Clinton just got pulverized in the third debate. Anybody that says she won did not watch. All she did was give canned responses, talk around everything and sounded super scripted, mechanical, like a talking robot. So monotonous....Total manipulator and 30+ thousand missing emails, give me a break. Nearly her entire life she rode bill's coattails.
    I watched and you are delusional.
    “Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage.”
    ― Anais Nin

  6. #286
    bye now
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    1,888
    Mentioned
    36 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    This could be a really interesting election. Given two seeming perceptions

    1. Hillary and Trump poll close to one another.
    2. A lot of people don't like either Hillary or Trump and will likely vote a third party candidate.

    There seems to be a pretty fair chance that no candidate will get the 270 electoral votes needed to be President. If this happens, the vote goes to the House; and if the House doesn't get enough votes for either candidate (too many abstain), then whomever the Senate votes as the newly elect VP becomes President in January (because there is no elected President).

  7. #287
    Queen of the Damned Aylen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Spiritus Mundi
    TIM
    psyche 4w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    11,339
    Mentioned
    1005 Post(s)
    Tagged
    42 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kim View Post
    I watched and you are delusional.
    Like attracts like? Trump is delusional too.

    Donald Trump is claiming that the third presidential debate was fixed as he believes that Fox News’s Chris Wallace gave Hillary Clinton the questions in advance.

    Trump did his usual batch of tweets of bogus online polls showing that he won the third debate, but then he tweeted something insane:

    Follow

    Donald J. Trump
    @realDonaldTrump


    Why didn't Hillary Clinton announce that she was inappropriately given the debate questions - she secretly used them! Crooked Hillary.
    10:55 AM - 20 Oct 2016


    Trump doesn’t seem to be talking about the disproven allegation that Hillary Clinton was given a Democratic primary debate question in advance, but if he was, it could be that he was trying to suggest that Clinton cheated again and was given the questions for the third presidential debate in advance by debate moderator Chris Wallace.

    The Republican nominee was clearly unhappy with Wallace because after the debate; he didn’t shake the moderator’s hand. Hillary Clinton displayed the basic courtesy of thanking Wallace after the debate, while Trump stood in his corner fuming.

    The Clinton/Wallace handshake is likely the reason for Trump’s belief that the debate was fixed.The debate wasn’t rigged. Hillary Clinton wasn’t given questions in advance. Clinton is a better debater than Trump. Hillary Clinton beat Donald Trump.Every Trump loss is not a conspiracy against him.

    Wallace was the most lenient debate moderator towards Trump of the 2016 campaign. He tossed the Republican nominee several softballs that he bobbled.

    It is apparent that in his own mind, Donald Trump never loses. He gets cheated, which is why the debates are rigged, the election is rigged, and everyone is out to get him.

    Someday America will look back on the 2016 election and realize how big of a bullet they dodged when they rejected Donald Trump.

    “My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.”​ —C.G. Jung
     
    YWIMW

  8. #288
    bye now
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    1,888
    Mentioned
    36 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I wish there was a way to elect Clinton and Trump. Give them both the title of President with the power to veto what the other one wants to do. That would be hilarious.

  9. #289
    Subthigh Socionics Is A Cult's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Beijing
    TIM
    TMI
    Posts
    19,276
    Mentioned
    514 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eliza Thomason View Post
    I looked up cultural marxism because I have not heard of it. The first explanation here makes it very clear what it is.http://www.urbandictionary.com/defin...ural%20marxism Yes, I see that.

    Just today there was a new story (I rarely watch the news anymore but it was on for 10 minutes) about which stores might be open Thanksgiving (they don't know yet, but they want you to keep watching because they will be letting us know). It really bothers me that stores would be open that day, pulling people in with huge sales they could have on any other day besides Thanksgiving. I am equally or more annoyed with them being open on Christmas and Easter. But for those latter I understand anti-Christian reasons. But Thanksgiving is not a religious holiday. Its about families being together. Why would you fight that?? Why would everyone not want to protect that? Then I see the Cultural Marxism explanation, and that explains why that day will not be protected, and why it will be continually undermined.
    The celebration of Easter and Christmas are not supported by scripture. Apart from that, Jesus was not born on December 25th, and the US is supposed to be a secular country.

  10. #290
    Subthigh Socionics Is A Cult's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Beijing
    TIM
    TMI
    Posts
    19,276
    Mentioned
    514 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eliza Thomason View Post
    Seriously? You also want to make sure that the people who have families who want to be with them on that day can't, because their teen or their Mom has to work, so you can shop? I just can't believe you are that cold-hearted Kim. You are just playing devil's advocate.

    I am old enough to remember when blue laws still had some effect. I was little, but I remember that Sundays were a more mellow quiet different day, and families had time to be together. A lot of people don't know what that is like now - like my college age son doesn't have that in his experience. People really need a day of rest once a week. A day of a different pace. But its the poor especially who end up working on Sunday's and holidays so they can serve us, who honestly aren't so needy. Well, that's not changing, none of us will plan ahead anymore because we need instant gratification, no matter who we put out so we can have it. But now our national holidays are disappearing, too. First its Columbus Day, Presidents Day, Labor Day, Memorial Day that are not real holidays for real working people because we have to have "huge sales!" so we need all those people working so we can shop on those days. Christmas and Easter are a little harder to "steal", so Thanksgiving is the next one to disappear... But we ought to be fighting for it.

    ... We are having a bit of drama and angst here today. My mom's needs are changing rapidly and we need medical opinion, and we are waiting to hear back from her doctor, and we are wondering what will be recommended and what changes we'll need to be making... the end of Parkinson's is similar - bad, long, and drawn out, so I feel bad for Hillary watching those videos. Something is wrong with her, but she feels (and her handlers feel) that she needs to keep going anyway. (My loved one who died of Parkinson's did not need to keep up appearances for anyone. The idea of trying to do that while also managing Parkinson's with its relentless deterioration is mind-boggling to me.)
    In Victorian England, "The working day could range from 10 to 16 hours for six days a week"...and that could include children. I see no reason why "holidays" need to be celebrated on Mondays to Fridays (i.e. the most common work days).

  11. #291
    Park's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    East of the sun, west of the moon
    TIM
    SLI 1w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    13,789
    Mentioned
    197 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SongOfSapphire View Post
    Like many people, I still think they're both awful. That said, I expect Trump is going to lose, possibly badly, and many of his supporters may lose their minds as a result.
    And if he wins, some of his haters are going to lose their minds and he may get assassinated a few days later.
    “Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”

    Quote Originally Posted by Gilly
    You've done yourself a huge favor developmentally by mustering the balls to do something really fucking scary... in about the most vulnerable situation possible.

  12. #292
    Park's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    East of the sun, west of the moon
    TIM
    SLI 1w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    13,789
    Mentioned
    197 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    On a related note, I thought the SNL skits were pretty well done.

    “Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”

    Quote Originally Posted by Gilly
    You've done yourself a huge favor developmentally by mustering the balls to do something really fucking scary... in about the most vulnerable situation possible.

  13. #293
    :popcorn: Capitalist Pig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,261
    Mentioned
    167 Post(s)
    Tagged
    7 Thread(s)

    Default


  14. #294
    Park's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    East of the sun, west of the moon
    TIM
    SLI 1w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    13,789
    Mentioned
    197 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    “Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”

    Quote Originally Posted by Gilly
    You've done yourself a huge favor developmentally by mustering the balls to do something really fucking scary... in about the most vulnerable situation possible.

  15. #295
    Queen of the Damned Aylen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Spiritus Mundi
    TIM
    psyche 4w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    11,339
    Mentioned
    1005 Post(s)
    Tagged
    42 Thread(s)

    Default


    “My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.”​ —C.G. Jung
     
    YWIMW

  16. #296

  17. #297
    :popcorn: Capitalist Pig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,261
    Mentioned
    167 Post(s)
    Tagged
    7 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Subteigh View Post
    (although Catholic crosses tend to have Jesuses still on them).
    The cross is still a valid symbol in Catholicism, and the ones with Jesuses still on them are known as a crucifix.

    Source: I was raised by a Catholic mother.

  18. #298
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    /
    Posts
    7,041
    Mentioned
    177 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    going by this,

     
    Right-Wing and Left-Wing Authoritarian Followers

    Authoritarian followers usually support the established authorities in their society, such as government officials and traditional religious leaders. Such people have historically been the “proper” authorities in life, the time-honored, entitled, customary leaders, and that means a lot to most authoritarians. Psychologically these followers have personalities featuring:
    1) a high degree of submission to the established, legitimate authorities in their society;
    2) high levels of aggression in the name of their authorities; and
    3) a high level of conventionalism.

    Because the submission occurs to traditional authority, I call these followers right-wing authoritarians. I’m using the word “right” in one of its earliest meanings, for in Old English “riht”(pronounced “writ”) as an adjective meant lawful, proper, correct, doing what the authorities said. (And when someone did the lawful thing back then, maybe the authorities said, with a John Wayne drawl, “You got that riht, pilgrim!”)

    In North America people who submit to the established authorities to extraordinary degrees often turn out to be political conservatives, so you can call them “right-wingers” both in my new-fangled psychological sense and in the usual political sense as well. But someone who lived in a country long ruled by Communists and who ardently supported the Communist Party would also be one of my psychological right-wing authoritarians even though we would also say he was a political left-winger. So a right-wing authoritarian follower doesn’t necessarily have conservative political views. Instead he’s someone who readily submits to the established authorities in society, attacks others in their name, and is highly conventional. It’s an aspect of his personality, not a description of his politics. Right-wing authoritarianism is a personality trait, like being characteristically bashful or happy or grumpy or dopey.

    You could have left-wing authoritarian followers as well, who support a revolutionary leader who wants to overthrow the establishment. I knew a few in the 1970s, Marxist university students who constantly spouted their chosen authorities, Lenin or Trotsky or Chairman Mao. Happily they spent most of their time fighting with each other, as lampooned in Monty Python’s Life of Brian where the People’s Front of Judea devotes most of its energy to battling, not the Romans, but the Judean People’s Front. But the left-wing authoritarians on my campus disappeared long ago. Similarly in America “the Weathermen” blew away in the wind. I’m sure one can find left-wing authoritarians here and there, but they hardly exist in sufficient numbers now to threaten democracy in North America. However I have found bucketfuls of right-wing authoritarians in nearly every sample I have drawn in Canada and the United States for the past three decades. So when I speak of “authoritarian followers” in this book I mean right-wing authoritarian followers, as identified by the RWA scale.

    source: http://members.shaw.ca/jeanaltemeyer...oritarians.pdf


    trump would be a 'left-wing authoritarian,' seeking possibly to "overthrow the establishment" - a revolutionary. he is traditionalist (can appeal to many of the "value voters") but is apparently unconventional (he is radical). he's a populist (seemingly) but also more conservative with fascist leanings.

    it's interesting that the author didn't think there were that many left-wing authoritarian followers in the u.s. because i think a certain chunk of trump's supporters are that. and i'm not sure they would look very much like "authoritarian followers" as defined.

    for left-wing authoritarian followers, would it be more along the lines of:

    1) a high degree of rebellion to the established, legitimate authorities in their society;
    2) high levels of aggression in support of positions supported by their radical non-established authorities, if not in the name of the authority her or himself; and
    3) a high level of radicalism.

    ???

    and how would you tell that apart from a freethinker?

    the other thing that comes to mind is those who wanted to incite violence at trump's rallies who fit much better the author's definition of an authoritarian follower, but i guess those would be right-wing ones still even though they are politically left.

    i'm still rather confused bc i feel like you can find a lot of the right-wing ones among liberals? i am not sure why the author would think otherwise?

    eta: i guess the issue i'm having in terms of liberal right-wing authoritarian followers (considering also the RWA scale assessment) is that "conventional" has different meanings for those politically left than it does for those politically right. the politically left will usually not be in favor of traditional "values" but that doesn't mean they don't adhere to liberal conventions (so they would score avg or lower on the RWA scale). and again, the question of how to differentiate "conventional" from freethinker in this, is unclear. i suppose the point would be, it's a person that soaks up the messages from liberal authorities and exhibits a certain zealotry about it, aggressively attacking others for any opposing political views. that said, in the u.s. many/most of the right-wing liberal ones will tend to be less violent in their hearts, perhaps because few u.s. liberal politicians are actually authoritarian enough--they're usually trying to expand or open up options for the individual rather than increase control and restrictions upon the individual, for instance.

     
    if i apply some conspiracy-ish thinking, i guess i could wonder about a leader who takes economic options away from the individual--s/he would simply appear to be trying to help the individual in a time when the economy is doing poorly, but despite best efforts, the economy continues to slide. this leader wouldn't be an authoritarian at all so much as the friendly face of death.

    in conclusion, i would say that an authoritarian is dangerous and poses a threat to individual rights and freedoms - that is the danger of trump. but authoritarians are not the only dangerous ones; there are other sorts of dangerous political "types," whether we have seen them yet or not. authoritarian followers are dangerous because they are zealots (e.g. the people who would kill abortion doctors) and would support a leader who harmed their fellow citizens. these people stand out because of their zealotry and are easier to spot and to see for what they are. followers of some of the other dangerous "types" might not be so obvious because they are not directly dangerous (or not dangerous at all), may be non-aggressive, and may support individual rights and freedoms.

     
    the hidden fear as i would apply to this election is, are obama and clinton (though clinton especially) "friendly faces of death"? do they fulfill an agenda of certain elites that will tank the economy and shrink the middle class even further? such a leader wouldn't even need to be aware of his/her role. (btw, it wouldn't mean the trend began with them--the friendly face of death appears when things have become bad enough that a more significant percentage of the population is unhappy with govt; angelic death extends its hand and promises to lead them out of their troubles, showering promises upon them.)

    but admittedly, i do get confused just bc of my feeling that something isn't right in all of this and it is represented more by one of the awful candidates we get to choose between. is trump a despot or more of an anti-hero savior? (he frames himself as a savior, which in itself is something to be wary of: the false savior or prophet figure.) is clinton someone who will build upon what the obama administration started for the betterment of all as she says, or this friendly face of death? it was so much easier to trust obama because he is clearly a good person - compassionate, intelligent, perceptive, thoughtful, full of integrity, etc. such a person would *do* something if he spotted some dangerous trend operating behind the scenes, i would think.

    and all-in-all to ignore the things trump says, ignore the red flags when there have been so many, seems utterly unwise. there have been so many indicators that as a leader, he would be dangerous. the risk is too high with him.




    related thread: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...-The-RWA-Scale

    @Adam Strange (since i think he introduced the topic originally, not bc i'm asking you specifically)
    Last edited by marooned; 10-23-2016 at 04:32 AM.

  19. #299
    Kill4Me's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    TIM
    SLE-Ti 8w7 so/sp
    Posts
    2,641
    Mentioned
    270 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Hell did I tell ya...Trump pulverized her in the third debate. Read 'em and weep.

    NEWTOWN, Pa./CLEVELAND (Reuters) - Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump gained on his Democratic rival Hillary Clinton among American voters this week, cutting her lead nearly in half, according to Reuters/Ipsos polling released on Friday.

    The polling data showed Trump's argument that the Nov. 8 election is "rigged" against him has resonated with members of his party.

    "Remember folks, it's a rigged system," Trump told a Pennsylvania rally on Friday. "That's why you've got to get out and vote, you've got to watch. Because this system is totally rigged."
    Talk about Icing on the Cake. Hillary is faker than fuck. Trump is a real person. Real people aren't perfect. They do imperfect things. They speak impulsively. They say things that bite them in the ass. HIllary is little miss perfect. She's had to be fake all her life in order to pull it off. That also makes her a horrible leader. she's meant to supervise. administrate. she's a bureaucrat. Either you vote for a real person or you vote for some manipulative bureaucrat. And it's not members of Trump's party that are increasing their support. It's Bernie supporters. Bernie was same. Fuck the establishment mentality. His supporters loved that. Ate it up. Hillary, exact opposite. You liberals are Bernie supporters.Trump is more like Bernie. Hillary is less like Bernie. Get it.


    https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-cli...144658341.html

  20. #300
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    /
    Posts
    7,041
    Mentioned
    177 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

  21. #301
    Kill4Me's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    TIM
    SLE-Ti 8w7 so/sp
    Posts
    2,641
    Mentioned
    270 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Look at Trump like he's a third party candidate.

  22. #302
    Kim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    TIM
    IEE e7 783 sx so
    Posts
    7,018
    Mentioned
    423 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kill4Me View Post
    You liberals are Bernie supporters.Trump is more like Bernie. Hillary is less like Bernie. Get it.
    Not according to Bernie:

    “I think what people will understand is that, as we look at the real issues facing the American people—and that is the decline of the American middle class, income inequality, and climate change—you’ve got a guy like Trump who denies the reality of climate change, which the scientists tell us is the major global crisis that we face,” said Sanders. “So, I think more and more people will catch on to what Mitt Romney—and I don’t often quote Mitt Romney—but Romney was right at least once and he called Trump a ‘phony’ and a ‘fraud,’ and I agree with that assertion.”
    “It’s pathetic and it’s laughable,” said Sanders. “Here is a guy who has exploited people for much of his business career. Here is a guy who claims how concerned he is about American companies going abroad to manufacture products—a very legitimate concern—and yet his own clothing manufacturing is done in other countries around the world where the poor workers are being exploited. And then he talks about how he’s going to stand up with working people, and he puts his business advisers council together and they’re all these billionaire conservative folks. So I don’t think there’s any reason for anyone to believe that Trump is going to stand with working people. He’s a billionaire; his proposals call for massive tax breaks for the wealthiest people in this country. This is not a guy who, in my view, is going to stand up for working people.”
    “You don’t like Clinton? Fine. Take a hard look at the issues that impact your life! When Hillary Clinton is saying she’s going to make public colleges and universities tuition-free for all families earning $125,000 or less—and deals significantly with student debt—you know what? That is a very big deal in this country. She’s going to double the number of community health centers in America so working-class people and low-income people can have access to health care. That’s a big deal. She is going to address climate change, she is going to raise taxes on the rich. So what I would ask those people who voted for me, even if you have concerns about Clinton—you don’t like this aspect, I understand that—but look at the hard issues that impact your life and your neighbor’s life, and then think whether or not you want Donald Trump to become president. I think if you frame it in that way, I think that people will end up voting for Clinton.”
    “Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage.”
    ― Anais Nin

  23. #303
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    628
    Mentioned
    38 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    It is important to set the record straight so that we all understand one another.
    For those of you who have not read the recent wikileaks, the information within them is significant and considering the magnitude of this election every voter has a right to know this information:
    -The united states created and is currently funding ISIS in a proxy war with Russia in Syria while the corrupt media & government is hiding this from the public. We are doing this for regime change, apparently it's in our geopolitical interest to destabilize the middle east. We are ISIS.
    -Most Russian foreign affairs experts agree we are headed into a new and much more volatile cold war with Russia as a result of this situation, a direct result of Clintons continued policies of regime change and support for terrorism.
    -The press (including google and youtube), FBI, executive & judicial branches are in large parts colluding with the clinton campaign and probably over 80 percent of what they say to you is absolute manipulation.
    -About 2 months ago, after the DNC emails were released by wikileaks, the Clinton campaign immediately claimed Russia was behind the leaks. Shortly afterwards a DNC staffer named Seth Rich was murdered in DC, shot in the back 2 times (and you can read about it on google, it's not been given wide coverage). Julian Assange then came forward and claimed that Seth Rich had been his source for the leaks and that he was murdered in response. Assange also clarified his source was not Russia. To be clear, it was Seth Rich and not Russia who leaked the DNC emails to wikileaks. Thus the Clinton campaign lied about the Russian involvement in the leaks, and they are connected to murder.
    -The podesta emails show strategy conversations of the Clinton campaign where they plan to compensate for Hillarys many scandals by pushing a media narrative that Russia is backing Trump.
    -The emails show Hillary Clinton illegally sold large amounts of Uranium, over 20 percent of this countries uranium supply, to Russia in exchange for millions donated to the Clinton foundation. This is probably the biggest story of the year which no one is talking about, literally corruption involving the handling of uranium.
    -Thanks to Project Veritas senior officials at the Clinton campaign have now been caught on video describing their operation for shipping in large amounts of people to Trump rallies, paying them to incite violence and reporting that patriots supporting Donald Trump are violent. This is what you saw with the Chicago riots and many other protests. People with blood coming out of their heads, cars being lit on fire and stampeded, etc..
    -Wikileaks Podesta emails show John Podesta, in collaboration with others, fabricating a story accusing Trump of sexual misconduct which then later became a big media headline. The story was about a craigslist job ad apparently alluding to sexual favors for Mr. Trump. We have it in the emails being fabricated, you can read the conversation yourself.
    -The emails also show how Clinton mishandled over 10 billion dollars donated to her foundation after the Haiti earthquake which killed over 150,000 people. 5% of the money went to rebuild haiti, the rest of the money is unaccounted for, and now Clintons brother owns one of the only gold mines in Haiti. Meanwhile the president of the senate of Haiti is speaking out about it and Haitian people are rioting over it, they were left without medical supplies, without their hospitals or homes rebuilt.
    -Project Veritas also reveals widespread efforts by the Clinton campaign, working with the DNC, to commit large scale election fraud. You can watch that video yourself and the undercover footage of the CLinton campaign talking about it, just youtube 'project veritas part 1 & 2'. You can literally watch Clintons own senior staff explain to you their detailed plan for committing mass election fraud.
    -There are actually many more things.

    Anyone voting Clinton this election is either clueless or completely immoral in my humble opinion.
    Carry on
    Last edited by rat200Turbo; 10-23-2016 at 04:57 AM.

  24. #304
    replica's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    TIM
    IEI 4w5
    Posts
    89
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I stumbled across a Syrian Christian Facebook page, and they were praising Assad. They view him as their protector, he truly is a hero to them. These are the people that he's supposedly oppressing. Come to find out, Syrian Muslims, Jews, and Christians alike all support Assad.


    http://www.ecowatch.com/syria-anothe...882180532.html
    "Bashar Assad's family is Alawite, a Muslim sect widely perceived as aligned with the Shia camp. “Bashar Assad was never supposed to be president," says journalist Sy Hersh. “His father brought him back from medical school in London when his elder brother, the heir apparent, was killed in a car crash."

    Before the war started, according to Hersh, Assad was moving to liberalize the country—“They had internet and newspapers and ATM machines and Assad wanted to move toward the west. After 9/11, he gave thousands of invaluable files to the CIA on Jihadist radicals, who he considered a mutual enemy."

    Assad's regime was deliberately secular and Syria was impressively diverse. The Syrian government and military, for example, were 80 percent Sunni. Assad maintained peace among his diverse peoples by a strong disciplined army loyal to the Assad family, an allegiance secured by a nationally esteemed and highly paid officer corps, a coldly efficient intelligence apparatus and a penchant for brutality which, prior to the war, was rather moderate compared to other Mideast leaders, including our current allies.

    According to Hersh, “He certainly wasn't beheading people every Wednesday like the Saudis do in Mecca." Another veteran journalist, Bob Parry, echoes that assessment. “No one in the region has clean hands but in the realms of torture, mass killings, civil liberties and supporting terrorism, Assad is much better than the Saudis."

    No one believed that the regime was vulnerable to the anarchy that had riven Egypt, Libya, Yemen and Tunisia. By the spring of 2011, there were small, peaceful demonstrations in Damascus against repression by Assad's regime. These were mainly the effluvia of the Arab Spring which spread virally across the Arab League states the previous summer. However, Huffington Post UK reported that in Syria the protests were, at least in part, orchestrated by the CIA. WikiLeaks cables indicate that the CIA was already on the ground in Syria."


    We are on the wrong side of this conflict. If Clinton gets her way, it's nothing but death and destruction.

  25. #305
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    /
    Posts
    7,041
    Mentioned
    177 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ratrevisits View Post
    -The emails also show how Clinton mishandled over 10 billion dollars donated to her foundation after the Haiti earthquake which killed over 150,000 people. 5% of the money went to rebuild haiti, the rest of the money is unaccounted for, and now Clintons brother owns one of the only gold mines in Haiti. Meanwhile the president of the senate of Haiti is speaking out about it and Haitian people are rioting over it, they were left without medical supplies, without their hospitals or homes rebuilt.
    i looked into the bolded statement and discovered that he does not own the gold mine. he was on the advisory board and his viard's company obtained a permit to mine gold there.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...vastation.html

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...506_story.html

    i don't know if you are referring to this in your statement "meanwhile the president of the senate of haiti is speaking out about it." former president of the senate btw. he has made allegations. the article i linked says they can't be confirmed - do you have something additional?

    in my rapid google search i was not able to find news of recent riots about this. perhaps you mean protests?

    anyway i haven't been very thorough in this. but i wish *you* would be thorough in doing some fact checking before you list all this shit.

    (i picked one statement of yours at random because i wanted to test the waters to see if i can just take you at your word. i can't.)
    Last edited by marooned; 10-24-2016 at 07:11 PM. Reason: correction!

  26. #306
    replica's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    TIM
    IEI 4w5
    Posts
    89
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kim View Post
    Not according to Bernie:
    Gonna have to disagree with Bernie.

    Those free college degrees will be worthless. The more degrees there are, the less valuable they become. This is apparent even now, job prospects are already pretty bleak for graduates. What we need is private sector growth.

    Why is Clinton Wall street's preferred candidate? In theory Trump's tax plan would cut their taxes more than Clinton's, yes? So why do they overwhelmingly donate to her? The answer is because she is a corporatist, and she'll play ball, and keep loopholes open. Trump however is a threat to them. Last year he said that hedge fund managers are “getting away with murder.” He has also criticized corporations that send jobs overseas and has suggested that he is open to raising taxes on Wall Street income.

    Clinton isn't gonna do anything about climate change. In the Podesta e-mails she said "I want to defend fracking." and Climate change environmentalist should "Get a life."
    http://www.politico.com/live-blog-up...f-ebe767a40000

    Sanders endorsing the devil was a massive disappointment. I'd speculate that Clinton and the DNC twisted his arm to get that endorsement, they desperately need his voters after all.

  27. #307
    replica's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    TIM
    IEI 4w5
    Posts
    89
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

  28. #308
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    /
    Posts
    7,041
    Mentioned
    177 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default ps. clinton and uranium one

    trump supporters, feel free to refute with actual sources.

    what wikileaks has to say: https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/press-release

    the referenced ny times article: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us...m-company.html

    the part i invite you to refute: http://correctrecord.org/fact-check-...-uranium-deal/

    the most important part of this is that clinton couldn't have stopped the deal; any influence she had would have been minimal. i can understand being annoyed with the deal itself, but is clinton herself to blame for it? no.

  29. #309
    Park's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    East of the sun, west of the moon
    TIM
    SLI 1w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    13,789
    Mentioned
    197 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    This forum has some very bad hombres.
    “Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”

    Quote Originally Posted by Gilly
    You've done yourself a huge favor developmentally by mustering the balls to do something really fucking scary... in about the most vulnerable situation possible.

  30. #310
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    628
    Mentioned
    38 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by replica View Post
    Gonna have to disagree with Bernie.

    Those free college degrees will be worthless. The more degrees there are, the less valuable they become. This is apparent even now, job prospects are already pretty bleak for graduates. What we need is private sector growth.

    Why is Clinton Wall street's preferred candidate? In theory Trump's tax plan would cut their taxes more than Clinton's, yes? So why do they overwhelmingly donate to her? The answer is because she is a corporatist, and she'll play ball, and keep loopholes open. Trump however is a threat to them. Last year he said that hedge fund managers are “getting away with murder.” He has also criticized corporations that send jobs overseas and has suggested that he is open to raising taxes on Wall Street income.

    Clinton isn't gonna do anything about climate change. In the Podesta e-mails she said "I want to defend fracking." and Climate change environmentalist should "Get a life."
    http://www.politico.com/live-blog-up...f-ebe767a40000

    Sanders endorsing the devil was a massive disappointment. I'd speculate that Clinton and the DNC twisted his arm to get that endorsement, they desperately need his voters after all.
    People haven't really understood Trumps tax plan and he hasn't explained it well, I'm not sure why. But he is getting rid of almost the entire tax code, simplifying it down to a couple pages from about 100,000 pages. This means the vast majority of loopholes and deductions for corporations will be gone. Then, he is lowering their tax rate substantially to compensate, along with the taxes of everyone else substantially. So while he is giving them a massive tax cut, it really amounts to a big but not excessive cut after you factor in all the tax loopholes he is closing - corporations currently do not pay the 35% tax rate. After factoring these things into account the biggest cuts are to the lower/ middle class and to the small companies / corporations that do not have teams of tax lawyers helping them abuse the tax code.
    Quote Originally Posted by inumbra View Post
    i looked into the bolded statement and discovered that he does not own the gold mine. he was on the advisory board and his company obtained a permit to mine gold there.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...vastation.html

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...506_story.html

    i don't know if you are referring to this in your statement "meanwhile the president of the senate of haiti is speaking out about it." former president of the senate btw. he has made allegations. the article i linked says they can't be confirmed - do you have something additional?

    in my rapid google search i was not able to find news of recent riots about this. perhaps you mean protests?

    anyway i haven't been very thorough in this. but i wish *you* would be thorough in doing some fact checking before you list all this shit.

    (i picked one statement of yours at random because i wanted to test the waters to see if i can just take you at your word. i can't.)
    First of all, if you want to add detail and clarify things I am not aware of that is perfectly fine, but you can drop the attitude. You have not changed my essential meaning. Infact your link only further supports my meaning: her brother along with more people also running the charity are on the board of the gold mine. Knowing this should inspire you to research this topic in all the detail you need.
    Do you not find it reprehensible that a person entrusted to provide charity relief to a disaster stricken area where 150,000 people died and are in need of hospitals / medicine / housing is instead using the donated money for a gold mine deal for her brother and others on the charity board? This directly cost many Haitian people their lives and still continues to as they have not rebuilt their hospitals and homes.
    These are the things which should primarily concern you. The president of senate of haiti being actually the former president should not be your primary concern. Although he was actually sitting president when this disaster happened which makes him more relevant but that's a small detail.
    Now, seeing you quote Clintons press statement to the NY times I assume you're a Clinton supporter.
    Rather than focus on the essential meaning: the abuse of power and neglect of the haitian people during one of the worst natural disasters we remember, you instead attempt to derail the matter by focusing on nonessential tangents to protect your selfish political stances. Well you have proven my final statement correct: that Clinton supporters are immoral liars like their candidate.
    You can provide clarity but do not exaggerate its significance / attempt to impress me with it while ignoring the topic.
    Last edited by rat200Turbo; 10-23-2016 at 06:10 PM.

  31. #311
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    /
    Posts
    7,041
    Mentioned
    177 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ratrevisits View Post
    First of all, if you want to add detail and clarify things I am not aware of that is perfectly fine, but you can drop the attitude. You have definitely have not changed my essential meaning.
    *snorts* i really hope the two links i gave are not the first you have read of this after making such claims as in your original post. where do you get your info, at makeitup.com?

    Infact your link only further supports my meaning: her brother along with more people also running the charity are on the board of the gold mine. Knowing this should inspire you to learn about this topic in all the detail you need.
    let's read the washington post article together. first of all the charity, clinton global initiative (cgi) - her brother is not running it but attends the meetings, and i guess, "gatherings." he claims it is to see old friends, not to explore business opportunities. at a gathering in 2012, he was introduced to angelo viard, chief executive of vcs mining who is also one of cgi's democratic donors (hillary clinton was still secretary of state at this time). rodham said that he's quite "accomplished in his own right," that he finds money for people (investors), and that he thought viard approached him not due to his ties with hillary clinton, but because he sought help drawing investors to haiti via rodham's firm gulf coast funds management.

    viard btw became a cgi member purely for business marketing/networking, but only attended two meetings bc he discovered these meetings are set up for charities to meet with potential donors (iow, not the platform for generating business deals that he was hoping for). he's not "running" cgi either.

    Quote Originally Posted by wp article
    Rodham joined the [vcs mining] board in October 2013, nine months after Hillary Clinton stepped down as secretary of state. Viard said he put Rodham on the board not because of his family connections, but because he worked for a firm, Gulf Coast Funds Management, that had access to investors.
    this was *after* vcs won the mining permit from the haitian govt in dec. 2012. rodham wasn't involved in that bc he wasn't on the board yet. that said, rodham and viard met at a gathering in 2012 - so they may have met before the permit was won.

    it seems that "immediately" after the mining permit was won by vcs, the haitian senate was against it. the permits were put on hold (which means no one can do any mining - in the beginning of the article it says that all there is of this mine is a piece of pvc pipe, which is to say there isn't a mine).

    Quote Originally Posted by wp article
    He said Rodham was compensated with stock options that will not vest unless the project is a success. He said Rodham has not landed any investors, adding, “It sounds like people were not interested in Haiti.”

    Rodham confirmed that he has received stock options in VCS and that they have not yet vested, saying, “Never seen ’em.”

    “I’m just trying to help him out a little bit. If it ever accomplishes anything, great,” Rodham said of Viard, adding that the people of Haiti “got a bad deal” — saddled with poverty and then hit in 2010 by a devastating earthquake — and that he hoped the gold mine could help the country recover.
    rodham got stock options, which currently amount to nothing since there is no mine. but if there ever is one, he will presumably benefit. he hasn't found them any foreign investors either.

    Do you not find it reprehensible that a person entrusted to provide charity relief to a disaster stricken area where 150,000 people died and are in need of hospitals / medicine / housing is instead using the donated money for a gold mine deal for her brother and others on the charity board?
    is she? please provide link with source. as already mentioned, neither rodham or viard are on the "cgi board."

    These are the things which should primarily concern you. The president of senate of haiti being actually the former president should not be your primary concern. Although he was actually sitting president when this disaster happened which makes him more relevant but that's a small detail.
    the thing that should primarily concern me about your first post is that it is designed to get everyone's emotions up while not providing accurate facts. it goes beyond details - you are misrepresenting things. if you want to formulate a conspiracy theory about this, you need to use facts (do not alter them for your purposes or for the purposes of creating drama) and provide a compelling case linking the various facts together.

    for instance, you could say, isn't it suspicious how seth rich was shot and killed but no one took his wallet (makes robbery a strange potential motive)? then you could say julian assange implied that rich was a source of information for him.

    it was a cryptic/evasive remark by assange btw, not him ever saying that rich was *the source* of *all* of the leaked dnc emails.

    Quote Originally Posted by newsweek
    “I am suggesting,” Assange said, “that our sources, ah, take risks, and they, they become concerned to see things occurring like that.” His organization later “clarified” on Twitter that “this should not be taken to imply that Seth Rich was a source for WikiLeaks or to imply that his murder is connected to our publications.”

    source: http://www.newsweek.com/seth-rich-mu...d-trump-492084
    as covered in my last post, you also gave misleading and incorrect info regarding ties between hillary clinton and uranium one. i sense a pattern here.

    Now, it appears you're a Clinton supporter.
    not really. i do not trust hillary clinton. i am interested in actual *true* information about her however, not your post full of spam.

    It amazes me that, rather than focus on the essential meaning: the abuse of power and neglect of the haitian people during one of the worst natural disasters we remember; that you would instead attempt to obfuscate the matter by focusing on nonessential tangents in order to protect your selfish political stances. I am fine with you providing clarity but do not attempt to impress me with it or dismiss the topic altogether.
    it amazes me that you make this post to rile everyone up without even knowing what you're talking about. it makes your motives seems really fucking questionable.


    another article on the gold mining not happening in haiti: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/ap/...pposition.html
    Last edited by marooned; 10-23-2016 at 07:09 PM. Reason: i've made corrections, sorry, i can't not edit a post 3 billion x

  32. #312
    Queen of the Damned Aylen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Spiritus Mundi
    TIM
    psyche 4w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    11,339
    Mentioned
    1005 Post(s)
    Tagged
    42 Thread(s)

    Default

    My problem with wikileaks is that I don't trust anyone that invades another's privacy, by hacking them, not to alter the stolen information, here and there, to further their own agenda so there will always be a level of skepticism toward anything that comes from that site. I have been given some alternative news sources to check out by a family member, who is still a diehard Bernie person, and happens to read every single wikileak for himself and then fact checks it more thoroughly than I ever could. He then evaluates it on the basis of whether it adds up or not. He doesn't trust that wikileaks is an uncorrupted source either but he does do a full analysis in order to decide how he will vote. He has crossed Trump completely off as an option due to moral considerations. I am pretty sure he is going to vote Stein or sit it out. He is the only person, in my family, who has not decided yet. :/





    https://www.facebook.com/SecularTalk

    https://www.facebook.com/BeastOfReason

    https://www.facebook.com/NowThisElec...8/?pnref=story

    Some republicans at one time were calling for the death penalty for the person responsible for wikileaks?

    As far as the hacking itself goes... I am willing to bet that most people here would be horrified if their emails, texts or even PMs were hacked and posted for everyone to see so I have a big problem with the way things were obtained regardless of who did it.

    “My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.”​ —C.G. Jung
     
    YWIMW

  33. #313
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    628
    Mentioned
    38 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Ugh.. ok. Whistleblowers should remain silent, don't want to invade the privacy of oppressive governments. Ok then.
    The people in wikileaks suffer persecution, literally put their lives on the line to get the information out... they have shown themselves to be of the highest ethical integrity and have a flawless track record for accuracy dating back a long time.
    Quote Originally Posted by inumbra View Post
    *snorts* i really hope the two links i gave are not the first you have read of this after making such claims as in your original post. where do you get your info, at makeitup.com?
    Your claim of being well read in the washington post, the new york times, and other mainstream news outlets is difficult to take seriously. The stories you have been quoting are simply press statements passed to these agencies by the Clinton campaign. Repeatedly, within the podesta emails, we see Podesta collaborating directly with these news outlets regarding scandals of this nature and telling them what to write. Infact the wikileak you linked earlier on Uranium One is one such press statement being sent from Podesta to the NYT, and I do plan on responding to it when I have time.
    However, burdening me with responding to the numerous Clinton campaign press statements regarding her many scandals is a monumentous task. Aside from the fact there are so many scandals, Clinton and her campaign take deception and obfuscation to a level of mastery that is unparalleled, and she has cooperation from most of the media.
    So, while I piece things together, there are some things we must bear in mind.
    I must maintain a fundamental skepticism of the new york times, the washington post, and other sources you keep citing. This is especially true for the nonessential details they include which are aimed at clouding and, through a general malaise, dismissing allegations within the minds of people. I'm mindful of any critical information they release, but if the information is not critical I must distrust it and ignore it.
    And I must also insist you focus on the most critical parts of the claim instead. Your sources are simply unreliable. Lies, obfuscation, and denials are how Clinton and her media cronies operate, and how they have responded to every scandal thus far.
    We must reduce the matter down to its basic components, and when we do that, we will see the matter is infact very black and white:
    Clintons brother and other charity members are involved in arranging a gold mine deal and the charity relief funds are missing. Haitians are furious about it as their hospitals / homes have not been rebuilt, and the president of senate at the time is talking about it.
    Let's read between the lines and focus on this part of it.
    Quote Originally Posted by inumbra View Post
    let's read the washington post article together. first of all the charity, clinton global initiative (cgi) - her brother is not running it but attends the meetings, and i guess, "gatherings." he claims it is to see old friends, not to explore business opportunities. at a gathering in 2012, he was introduced to angelo viard, chief executive of vcs mining who is also one of cgi's democratic donors (i assume hillary clinton was still secretary of state at this time). rodham said that he's quite "accomplished in his own right," that he finds money for people (investors), and that he thought viard approached him not due to his ties with hillary clinton, but because he sought help drawing investors to haiti via rodham's firm gulf coast funds management.

    viard btw became a cgi member purely for business marketing/networking, but only attended two meetings bc he discovered these meetings are set up for charities to meet with potential donors (iow, not the platform for generating business deals that he was hoping for). he's not "running" cgi either.

    this was *after* vcs won the mining permit from the haitian govt in dec. 2012. rodham wasn't involved in that bc he wasn't on the board yet. that said, rodham and viard met at a gathering in 2012 - so may have met before the permit was won.

    it seems that "immediately" after the mining permit was won by vcs, the haitian senate was against it. the permits were put on hold (which means no one can do any mining - in the beginning of the article it says that all there is of this mine is a piece of pvc pipe, which is to say there isn't a mine).

    rodham got stock options, which currently amount to nothing since there is no mine. but if there ever is one, he will presumably benefit. he hasn't found them any foreign investors either.

    is she? please provide link with source. as already mentioned, neither rodham or viard are on the "cgi board."
    All of this addressed in the previous response. I fundamentally disturst your source and I do not consider these statements to be critically important. Some are non-falsifiable and also come directly from the clinton campaign, and others like 'there is currently no mine' are just not relevant.
    For an interesting experience go watch Clintons press statements and CNNs / other agencies press statements regarding the email scandal over the course of a 2 year long investigation, there are many youtube compilations of it.

    Quote Originally Posted by inumbra View Post

    the thing that should primarily concern me about your first post is that it is designed to get everyone's emotions up while not providing accurate facts. it goes beyond details - you are misrepresenting things. if you want to formulate a conspiracy theory about this, you need to use facts (do not alter them for your purposes or for the purposes of creating drama) and provide a compelling case linking the various facts together.
    Inumbra, you don't know that your facts are accurate. That's the problem I have with your post: you trust the washington post, the new york times, and other agencies as authorities for "factual information". I have seen Podesta directly communicating with various news agencies including the washington post and telling them what to say with regards to scandals like this.
    And you should be outraged by this, you should be absolutely emotionally affected and mobilized.

    Quote Originally Posted by inumbra View Post
    for instance, you could say, isn't it suspicious how seth rich was shot and killed but no one took his wallet (makes robbery a strange potential motive)? then you could say julian assange implied that rich was a source of information for him.

    it was a cryptic/evasive remark by assange btw, not him ever saying that rich was *the source* of *all* of the leaked dnc emails.
    This is really the difference between us, you have pinpointed it. I am willing to read in between the lines and use my brain, I do not need everything spelled out for me.
    Julian is not bullshiting us and teasing us with this Seth Rich thing. Though he did not explicitly say Seth was his source, he explained his typical reluctance to reveal the name of ANY source as it undermines wikileaks ability to collect information; so he alluded to Seth Rich being the source so heavily that anyone could tell. He made it very obvious to all of us. No, I don't accept your skepticism. Seth Rich was the source of the DNC emails, and we know that.

    Quote Originally Posted by inumbra View Post
    as covered in my last post, you also gave misleading and incorrect info regarding ties between hillary clinton and uranium one. i sense a pattern here.
    Already discussed briefly and if I ever have time I will give a proper response to your Clinton campaign press statement.

    Quote Originally Posted by inumbra View Post
    not really. i do not trust hillary clinton. i am interested in actual *true* information about her however, not your post full of spam.
    Well, you actually do. You trust the news agencies that work for her and you have repeatedly cited her press statements.

    Quote Originally Posted by inumbra View Post
    it amazes me that you make this post to rile everyone up without even knowing what you're talking about. it makes your motives seems really fucking questionable.


    another article on the gold mining not happening in haiti: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/ap/...pposition.html
    It sounds like you're masturbating when you say that phrase: "really fucking questionable". Like your mind is off in this black space where only you exist and you're just masturbating...
    Last edited by rat200Turbo; 10-23-2016 at 08:41 PM.

  34. #314
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    /
    Posts
    7,041
    Mentioned
    177 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    ugh crazedrat. you can't read. like now you're even misrepresenting what i said. e.g. "claim to be well read." there are often facts that everyone agrees on - things like when was the meeting, who met, when did someone join a board, is someone running a charity or are they not - like do you see how all your confusing presentation even messing up the basic info will make it really difficult for someone to follow anything you say. i just did *the first part of this* aka just a basic fucking fact check.

    the main issue i'm having with the mining one is that there isn't even any mining happening. can we please focus on something that has a greater significance.

    do you deny the basic facts of this:

    - no mining is happening (the haitian govt is caught up in internal shit and can't grant permits bc of that)
    - no money having been made from gold (no mining!)
    - rodham and viard are not on the board of clinton foundation, they are not running the clinton global initiative
    - the "eyebrow raising" about this wasn't about cgi using donations that were supposed to help haiti to fund mining - they were about how clinton's brother got involved with this mining company in haiti, how he met viard at a cgi gathering, and while clinton was still secretary of state
    - wikileaks themselves tweeted that they weren't saying that seth rich was murdered or a source necessarily. https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status...616640?lang=en if you take that to mean they're saying "no, really we are, but we can't say bc of our rule about our sources" you are speculating - which means you are making a supposition not a fact. just say it's a supposition instead of being like "this is the TRUTH" bc that is so misleading and misrepresentative

    one tip about basic facts that anyone can look up - news sources like the washington post aren't going to lie about those because people can easily call them out on it. you can probably count on the basic facts they present. they also will usually put statements of revisions on articles if someone points out they were in error.

    if much of the news media is, as many claim, in the pocket of clinton or whatever it's their slant that will be impacted, what they don't say, what they won't cover, what they won't dig into, what they will deflect away from, etc. if they are to fabricate information entirely, they would need to be quite careful bc if they are caught the consequences would not be in their best interest. i don't think that something like "no vcs gold mining is happening in haiti" is a false statement or part of a conspiracy, and that really there is a mining operation well under way right at this moment and hillary is clinking her champagne glass with her brother right now as they review his financial gains and giggle.

    news articles are only a starting point, you would have to dig deeper to get more info. it's time consuming and hard work (it's called research). but it helps if you start with getting the basic facts straight if you wish to be taken seriously and not just as a troll.

    ps. personally insulting me and saying i can't use my brain because i won't agree with your word salad is a sad attack to compensate for how you just want to believe this without checking on anything. iow, you are being intellectually lazy, and that is not my fault - though i do understand intellectual laziness personally. it's why i am in fact *not* well read on all these news articles. all i have are unconfirmed suspicions and a sea of overlapping and contradictory ones. but in short, you are just being a jerk in addition to trolling.

  35. #315
    replica's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    TIM
    IEI 4w5
    Posts
    89
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aylen View Post
    My problem with wikileaks is that I don't trust anyone that invades another's privacy, by hacking them, not to alter the stolen information, here and there, to further their own agenda so there will always be a level of skepticism toward anything that comes from that site. I have been given some alternative news sources to check out by a family member, who is still a diehard Bernie person, and happens to read every single wikileak for himself and then fact checks it more thoroughly than I ever could. He then evaluates it on the basis of whether it adds up or not. He doesn't trust that wikileaks is an uncorrupted source either but he does do a full analysis in order to decide how he will vote. He has crossed Trump completely off as an option due to moral considerations. I am pretty sure he is going to vote Stein or sit it out. He is the only person, in my family, who has not decided yet. :/





    https://www.facebook.com/SecularTalk

    https://www.facebook.com/BeastOfReason

    https://www.facebook.com/NowThisElec...8/?pnref=story

    Some republicans at one time were calling for the death penalty for the person responsible for wikileaks?

    As far as the hacking itself goes... I am willing to bet that most people here would be horrified if their emails, texts or even PMs were hacked and posted for everyone to see so I have a big problem with the way things were obtained regardless of who did it.
    Clinton was hacked because she negligently had an unsecured private email server to hide from FOIA requests and other oversights.. No shit she got hacked, and she damn well deserved it. Wikileaks says they didn't obtain these by hacking by the way, the say they were leaked to them by DNC insiders like Seth Rich, who coincidentally was murdered. Wikileaks has a 10 year record of 100% legitimacy. No one has ever falsified what they've released.

    I'm actually glad she got hacked. I probably would have voted for her had I not seen who she really was. Thanks wikileaks.

    Last edited by replica; 10-23-2016 at 08:54 PM.

  36. #316
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    /
    Posts
    7,041
    Mentioned
    177 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    ps. regarding missing charity relief funds, i found 2 things the first related to clinton, the second seemingly not at all (the red cross)

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...s-never-built/

    http://www.npr.org/2015/06/03/411524...n-haiti-relief

    i need *YOUR SOURCE* that this money is missing.

  37. #317
    Queen of the Damned Aylen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Spiritus Mundi
    TIM
    psyche 4w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    11,339
    Mentioned
    1005 Post(s)
    Tagged
    42 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by replica View Post
    Clinton was hacked because she negligently had an unsecured private email server to hide from FOIA requests and other oversights.. No shit she got hacked, and she damn well deserved it. Wikileaks says they didn't obtain these by hacking by the way, the say they were leaked by DNC insiders like Seth Rich, who coincidentally was murdered.

    I'm actually glad she got hacked. I probably would have voted for her had I not seen who she really was. Thanks wikileaks.

    Wikileaks has a 10 year record of 100% legitimacy. No one has ever falsified what they've released.

    I see you ignored the tax plan and only responded to my personal skepticism. My opinion doesn't matter. I am not a US citizen therefore ineligible to vote. My opinion makes NO DIFFERENCE to the outcome. I can only sit here and watch. I have never been interested in politics until I realized that the american people's minds were so warped by reality tv and conspiracy theories that they could not see that Trump is a selfish, greedy person whose motives for running have nothing to do with helping anyone but himself and his family. You can dismiss my opinions if you like since my vote is floating in the ether and will not be counted. You can focus on those who actually can vote if your motives are to convince someone to vote the way you want them to. My sphere of influence is very small and I don't expect anything I post has much effect on changing minds here.

    “My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.”​ —C.G. Jung
     
    YWIMW

  38. #318
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    628
    Mentioned
    38 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    You pass a raven walking on the sidewalk and conclude it's your dead boyfriend reaching out to you but the president of the senate of Haiti makes a claim and it's a conspiracy theory. Your opinions are dismissed.
    Inumbra, I have to go now. We can continue this later. Have a nice day

  39. #319
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    /
    Posts
    7,041
    Mentioned
    177 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ratrevisits View Post
    You pass a raven walking on the sidewalk and conclude it's your dead boyfriend reaching out to you but the president of the senate of Haiti makes a claim and it's a conspiracy theory. Your opinions are dismissed.
    Inumbra, I have to go now. We can continue this later. Have a nice day
    you're just deflecting from presenting how you know anything because you can't do it. you can't support your positions. you can't even provide a source *you* trust. all you can do is attempt to invalidate me by making shit up about me (you're like inumbra is a superstitious thinker - another thing you can't defend).

    i would be delighted if you would prove me wrong by actually giving some support to your positions. but you won't, will you? the sad thing is that i am actually more open in this than you apparently are, even though you want to paint it the opposite way. let me know if you ever have anything of substance.

  40. #320
    Raver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    TIM
    Ne-IEE 6w7 sp/sx
    Posts
    4,899
    Mentioned
    221 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ratrevisits View Post
    People haven't really understood Trumps tax plan and he hasn't explained it well, I'm not sure why. But he is getting rid of almost the entire tax code, simplifying it down to a couple pages from about 100,000 pages. This means the vast majority of loopholes and deductions for corporations will be gone. Then, he is lowering their tax rate substantially to compensate, along with the taxes of everyone else substantially. So while he is giving them a massive tax cut, it really amounts to a big but not excessive cut after you factor in all the tax loopholes he is closing - corporations currently do not pay the 35% tax rate. After factoring these things into account the biggest cuts are to the lower/ middle class and to the small companies / corporations that do not have teams of tax lawyers helping them abuse the tax code.
    If this is true, then the idea of closing the loopholes of corporations is great, but he's still lowering the tax rate for the wealthiest far too much and for the middle class and poor far too little:





    So for Trump for instance, those making $20,000 a year will keep an extra $169.50, while those making $250,000 a year will keep an extra $9,831. In other words, only the rich will have extra cash in their pocket, while the poor and middle class won't receive much. As for Hillary, losing $43.50 for the middle class making $55,000 a year and $517.50 for the rich making $250,000 a year is not really a big deal. Hillary's corporate tax increases will be huge and this will be used to offset the loopholes that corporations will exploit. In the end of the day, their tax plan is not that different, they just have different ways of achieving the roughly the same result.
    “We cannot change the cards we are dealt, just how we play the hand.” Randy Pausch

    Ne-IEE
    6w7 sp/sx
    6w7-9w1-4w5

Page 8 of 22 FirstFirst ... 45678910111218 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •