This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

'He's A CON ARTIST, He's A FRAUD': It's Even WORSE Than You Think

Go to page : 1, 2  Next

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 2]



View user profile
I never respected Trump when he was in the private sector. I do not respect metrosexuals who are more concerned about his personal vanity, and who cheat on their wives.....I have seen fifty such characters in my life, and I would not even golf with these poor insecure creatures who are capable of immeasurable pain in other folks lives because they are basically sociopaths.

View user profile
The problem is not Trump, or not JUST Trump anyway. It's that someone as manifestly unqualified as Trump is could be nominated for the office of President of the United States.

The fact that two such terrible candidates as Hillary and Trump could be the only choice is evidence that our system is horribly broken. Perhaps four years of this disordered putz will cause our political leaders to rethink the nomination process.

View user profile
Deus X wrote:The problem is not Trump, or not JUST Trump anyway. It's that someone as manifestly unqualified as Trump is could be nominated for the office of President of the United States.

The fact that two such terrible candidates as Hillary and Trump could be the only choice is evidence that our system is horribly broken. Perhaps four years of this disordered putz will cause our political leaders to rethink the nomination process.

Why do you keep bringing Hillary into the equation? We wouldn't be in this position at all if she had won...which she did. I think you just don't believe women can hold positions of power.

View user profile
Why do you keep bringing Hillary into the equation? We wouldn't be in this position at all if she had won...which she did. I think you just don't believe women can hold positions of power.


No. I rarely agree with the writer, but he is right. You tell me why ten Republicans fought for the nomination and only two in the Democratic Party. When was the last time when so few candidates ran. The arrogance and hubris of Hillary neutralized her clear high level competency compared to Donald Trump, but are you telling me we only have these old people to choose? Where are some late forties or fifties experienced government candidates. The nomination system is far from perfect and until we address money in campaign financing we will consistently have poor candidates because they are simply shills for campaign contributors.

View user profile
2seaoat wrote:Why do you keep bringing Hillary into the equation? We wouldn't be in this position at all if she had won...which she did. I think you just don't believe women can hold positions of power.


No.  I rarely agree with the writer, but he is right.  You tell me why ten Republicans fought for the nomination and only two in the Democratic Party.  When was the last time when so few candidates ran.  The arrogance and hubris of Hillary neutralized her clear high level competency compared to Donald Trump, but are you telling me we only have these old people to choose?  Where are some late forties or fifties experienced government candidates.  The nomination system is far from perfect and until we address money in campaign financing we will consistently have poor candidates because they are simply shills for campaign contributors.

There were 2 dozen Republican candidates initially, most indistinguishable from the others, and 4 Democrats. By your logic, Ronnie Raygun would never have been president. The country would be better off if he had not. I believe that gender absolutely played a role. I also think that the job of president is a tough one, but I had much more faith in Hillary's ability than in ANY of the "R" candidates, including the Orange Oompa Loompa. With age sometimes comes wisdom...sometimes not. You can thank YOUR PARTY for Citizens United v. FEC.

View user profile
Floridatexan wrote:
Why do you keep bringing Hillary into the equation?  

For a start, how about her refusal to release the transcripts of her Wall Street speeches and her "basket of deplorables" comment.

She's a paid shill for Wall Street which drove the economy into a ditch in 2008-- not just the U.S. economy but the WORLD economy.

And, regarding the "deplorables" comment, if she holds in such contempt a vast swath of the American populace, she shouldn't be leading the country.

I'm not against women in positions of power--I'm a fervent supporter of Elizabeth Warren, Sheila Bair and Brooksley Born--I now just despise both the Clintons even though I used to be a supporter.

I voted for Hillary and have voted for the Democratic candidate in 13 Presidential elections, but if anybody other than Trump had run against her, I would have voted for them. She's the deplorable--and keep in mind: SHE LOST TO TRUMP!

How can you still support her?

View user profile
Deus X wrote:
Floridatexan wrote:
Why do you keep bringing Hillary into the equation?  

For a start, how about her refusal to release the transcripts of her Wall Street speeches and her "basket of deplorables" comment.

She's a paid shill for Wall Street which drove the economy into a ditch in 2008-- not just the U.S. economy but the WORLD economy.

And, regarding the "deplorables" comment, if she holds in such contempt a vast swath of the American populace, she shouldn't be leading the country.

I'm not against women in positions of power--I'm a fervent supporter of Elizabeth Warren, Sheila Bair and Brooksley Born--I now just despise both the Clintons even though I used to be a supporter.

I voted for Hillary and have voted for the Democratic candidate in 13 Presidential elections, but if anybody other than Trump had run against her, I would have voted for them. She's the deplorable--and keep in mind: SHE LOST TO TRUMP!

How can you still support her?

I share her contempt. A large number of people in this country get their "news" from sources that push hate propaganda...and they believe it. Hillary should have had it in the bag, and I thought she did. Most of the right wing smears against both her and Bill are lies and distortions. She most certainly did not cause the 2008 crash...that was George W Bush and his cohorts.

By continuing to attack her, you're effectively buying in to the right wing agenda. She is and was worlds better than what we have now.

View user profile
I wouldn't have gone with "basket of deplorables." I'd have used "bucket of dung," because, honestly, that's what Trump supporters pretty much are at this point. My respect for 'em started out pretty low but it goes down farther every day. Anybody that supports what that guy's doing is absolutely worthless as a human being. If that's an extremist view, then it is.

They sneer at "political correctness" until you call them what they are, or won't placate them by saying "Merry Christmas," or if you call them racist when they do racist things. Then they cry. And I'm getting to be of the mind of... let 'em cry.

View user profile
Floridatexan wrote:
Deus X wrote:
Floridatexan wrote:
Why do you keep bringing Hillary into the equation?  

For a start, how about her refusal to release the transcripts of her Wall Street speeches and her "basket of deplorables" comment.

She's a paid shill for Wall Street which drove the economy into a ditch in 2008-- not just the U.S. economy but the WORLD economy.

And, regarding the "deplorables" comment, if she holds in such contempt a vast swath of the American populace, she shouldn't be leading the country.

I'm not against women in positions of power--I'm a fervent supporter of Elizabeth Warren, Sheila Bair and Brooksley Born--I now just despise both the Clintons even though I used to be a supporter.

I voted for Hillary and have voted for the Democratic candidate in 13 Presidential elections, but if anybody other than Trump had run against her, I would have voted for them. She's the deplorable--and keep in mind: SHE LOST TO TRUMP!

How can you still support her?

I share her contempt.  A large number of people in this country get their "news" from sources that push hate propaganda...and they believe it.  Hillary should have had it in the bag, and I thought she did.  Most of the right wing smears against both her and Bill are lies and distortions.  She most certainly did not cause the 2008 crash...that was George W Bush and his cohorts.  

By continuing to attack her, you're effectively buying in to the right wing agenda.  She is and was worlds better than what we have now.





cheers cheers cheers

View user profile
Floridatexan wrote:
I share her contempt.  A large number of people in this country get their "news" from sources that push hate propaganda...and they believe it.  Hillary should have had it in the bag, and I thought she did.  Most of the right wing smears against both her and Bill are lies and distortions.  She most certainly did not cause the 2008 crash...that was George W Bush and his cohorts.  

By continuing to attack her, you're effectively buying in to the right wing agenda.  She is and was worlds better than what we have now.

Let's break this down:

I share her contempt.  A large number of people in this country get their "news" from sources that push hate propaganda...and they believe it.

Years ago, when my kids were tweens, one of them was in the car with me when I went off on a carload of "white-trash hillbillies" that had cut me off. He looked at me in shock and said "Dad, they're just people." I was immediately filled with shame and never forgot it.

Hillary should have had it in the bag

So Clinton believes she lost Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania and the presidency because of the bigotry of middle America.

One problem with her analysis: Millions of those white people who voted for Donald Trump also proudly voted for Barack Obama. There are nearly 700 counties in the United States that voted twice for Barack Obama, one-third of which flipped to Trump in 2016. According to Nate Cohn of The New York Times, "almost one in four of President Obama's 2012 white working-class supporters defected from the Democrats in 2016, either supporting Mr. Trump or voting for a third-party candidate." Are all those Trump-Obama voters bigots? Millions of once reliably Democratic voters pulled the lever for the first black president, yet they were suddenly whipped up into a racist furor by Trump's "racial and ethnic and sexist appeals"? Give me a break.

As Democratic pollster Stan Greenberg has pointed out, many of these working-class Obama-Trump voters were not even white. "The Democrats don't have a 'white working-class problem,' " Greenberg wrote recently in the American Prospect. "They have a 'working-class problem' ... Democrats have lost support with all working-class voters across the electorate, including the Rising American Electorate of minorities, unmarried women, and millennials."


http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/commentary/ct-hillary-clinton-lost-white-voters-20170914-story.html

Need I say more about this particular subject?

She most certainly did not cause the 2008 crash...that was George W Bush and his cohorts.  

I didn't say, as you well know, that she did cause it, but you have to ask yourself what was in those Wall Street speeches that she didn't want made public? You might also note that George W. Bush and his cohorts didn't cause the 2008 crisis, they merely took advantage of the repeal of Glass-Steagall which Bill Clinton signed in '99. She and her husband have been Wall Street toadies for decades.

Clinton installed Robert Rubin and Larry Summers in the Treasury, which resulted in the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, which officially did in Glass-Steagall and the Commodity Futures Modernization Act, which left the derivatives market a laissez-faire Wild West (not to mention a disastrous strong dollar policy that was a critical and underrated factor in the bubble). He also reappointed Ayn Rand-acolyte Alan Greenspan, who has as much responsibility as anyone for creating the crisis, as Fed chairman—twice.

Now it’s true that Clinton faced an extremely hostile Republican Congress for the last six years of his presidency. But his administration actively encouraged the big deregulatory legislation, and squashed its own dissenters, like Brooksley Born, who saw disaster ahead.


https://archives.cjr.org/the_audit/bill_clinton_the_republicans_m.php

By continuing to attack her, you're effectively buying in to the right wing agenda.

This sounds exactly like Trump calling Democrats traitors for not applauding during his State of the Union speech. Congratulations, now you can change the sign to read "Four legs good, two legs better".

View user profile
By continuing to attack her, you're effectively buying in to the right wing agenda.

This sounds exactly like Trump calling Democrats traitors for not applauding during his State of the Union speech. Congratulations, now you can change the sign to read "Four legs good, two legs better".

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I get it that you hate Hillary. Any more Dems and women that you hate? Give it a rest with the woman bashing. If she makes another run for POTUS I'll damn her too but the election is over and the insane Russian troll is in the White House. Embarassed

View user profile
Telstar wrote: ...the insane Russian troll is in the White House.  


Trump is in the White House because the Clinton Crime Family bought control of the Democratic Party in order to get Hillary nominated and Bernie shoved to the sidelines.

Donna Brazile, the former interim Democratic National Committee chairwoman, is explosively outlining how the Hillary Clinton campaign seized control of the Democratic Party as far back as August 2015.

Brazile said that DNC CEO Amy Dacey signed an agreement with Clinton Campaign Manager Robby Mook in August 2015 known as the Joint Fundraising Agreement, according to Brazile's new editorial in Politico. The agreement, which occurred between the DNC, Hillary Victory Fund and Hillary for America, stipulated that the Clinton campaign would raise money for and invest in the DNC in return for Clinton controlling the party's finances, strategy and money raised. It also required the DNC to consult with the campaign about "staffing, budgeting, data, analytics, and mailings," according to Brazile, and gave the campaign final decision-making power on staffing matters.


https://www.salon.com/2017/11/02/donna-brazile-hillary-controlled-the-democratic-party/

And then she lost the election because she was such a lousy candidate. From issues about her server to the "deplorables" comment to her refusal to release the transcripts of her Wall Street speeches, she was the WRONG candidate.

View user profile
Deus X wrote:
Telstar wrote: ...the insane Russian troll is in the White House.  


Trump is in the White House because the Clinton Crime Family bought control of the Democratic Party in order to get Hillary nominated and Bernie shoved to the sidelines.

Donna Brazile, the former interim Democratic National Committee chairwoman, is explosively outlining how the Hillary Clinton campaign seized control of the Democratic Party as far back as August 2015.

Brazile said that DNC CEO Amy Dacey signed an agreement with Clinton Campaign Manager Robby Mook in August 2015 known as the Joint Fundraising Agreement, according to Brazile's new editorial in Politico. The agreement, which occurred between the DNC, Hillary Victory Fund and Hillary for America, stipulated that the Clinton campaign would raise money for and invest in the DNC in return for Clinton controlling the party's finances, strategy and money raised. It also required the DNC to consult with the campaign about "staffing, budgeting, data, analytics, and mailings," according to Brazile, and gave the campaign final decision-making power on staffing matters.


https://www.salon.com/2017/11/02/donna-brazile-hillary-controlled-the-democratic-party/

And then she lost the election because she was such a lousy candidate. From issues about her server to the "deplorables" comment to her refusal to release the transcripts of her Wall Street speeches, she was the WRONG candidate.





Who cares? No Hillary, no Bernie and hopefully Trump will go down in 2020 if shithole states like Florida, Michigan and Pennsylvania do the right thing.

View user profile
Telstar wrote: if shithole states like Florida, Michigan and Pennsylvania do the right thing.

All three of those states went for Obama in 2012. What happened?

View user profile
Deus X wrote:
Telstar wrote: ...the insane Russian troll is in the White House.  


Trump is in the White House because the Clinton Crime Family bought control of the Democratic Party in order to get Hillary nominated and Bernie shoved to the sidelines.

Donna Brazile, the former interim Democratic National Committee chairwoman, is explosively outlining how the Hillary Clinton campaign seized control of the Democratic Party as far back as August 2015.

Brazile said that DNC CEO Amy Dacey signed an agreement with Clinton Campaign Manager Robby Mook in August 2015 known as the Joint Fundraising Agreement, according to Brazile's new editorial in Politico. The agreement, which occurred between the DNC, Hillary Victory Fund and Hillary for America, stipulated that the Clinton campaign would raise money for and invest in the DNC in return for Clinton controlling the party's finances, strategy and money raised. It also required the DNC to consult with the campaign about "staffing, budgeting, data, analytics, and mailings," according to Brazile, and gave the campaign final decision-making power on staffing matters.


https://www.salon.com/2017/11/02/donna-brazile-hillary-controlled-the-democratic-party/

And then she lost the election because she was such a lousy candidate. From issues about her server to the "deplorables" comment to her refusal to release the transcripts of her Wall Street speeches, she was the WRONG candidate.

In your not-so-humble opinion, which is like...well, you know. This thread is about the pretender in the White House, not about Hillary. I wouldn't have voted for her if I didn't trust her, although there were many, many attempts through decades to discredit and diminish her. I actually relate to Hillary. I know many of the obstacles she overcame that you apparently don't understand, or more to the point, don't want to understand.



Barbra Streisand, Contributor
Singer, actress, director, producer, writer, activist

What Might Have Been In 2017 Had Hillary Clinton Won

We are approaching the year anniversary of Donald Trump’s Electoral College victory over Hillary Clinton. He lost the popular vote by close to three million votes, promptly claimed massive voter fraud and then set up a phony voter fraud commission to vainly prove his point.

Since the election we have learned more about widespread Russian interference on behalf of Trump and the GOP, as well as possible collusion with the effort by individuals in the Trump campaign. We will see what comes out of Robert Mueller’s investigation.

Many of us are stressed every day wondering what craziness Trump will inflict on the world. Perhaps we should consider what might have been, the what ifs of a Hillary win, what has been lost and what opportunities were squandered this year.

Rather than millions of Americans waking up worrying about losing their health care, President Hillary Clinton would have worked with Congress (yes, even a Republican Congress) to place Obamacare on firm footing for the future. Hillary’s deep knowledge of the issues and lifelong concern for women, children and poor Americans would have made her a fantastic leader in healthcare reform this year.

Hillary would have developed an employment program to repair our infrastructure while keeping climate change issues at the forefront of her policies. We are left to wonder if Trump will continue to ignore the scientific reasons behind the unprecedented stream of Category 4 and 5 hurricanes hitting our shores this year.

President Hillary Clinton would not have withdrawn the United States from the Paris Climate Accord. We are now the only country not to join except for Syria.

Any tax reform program would have benefitted the middle class, ensuring that the wealthy, Wall Street and corporations paid their fair share. Instead, what is proposed will be another huge increase to the deficit and further enrich those who are already wealthy.

Rather than eviscerating the State Department and ranting and raving at the United Nations, President Hillary Clinton would have promoted diplomacy. American’s rivals abroad would have respected and worked with President Hillary Clinton. The Russians knew her well, and feared her enough to work hard to undermine our electoral processes. They knew that a President Clinton would have opposed continued Russian aggression in Ukraine or the Baltic States and would have pushed back hard against interference in our elections and those of our European allies. North Korea would have known that they could launch missiles if they chose, but that they would face a determined—and unified—coalition of nations opposed to their provocation. They would not have been facing this blustery man in the White House who has alienated our allies and insulted other nations at the UN. Lacking basic diplomatic skills, he is a bull in a china shop. America would be stronger, more secure, and more respected today under Hillary Clinton’s leadership.

It goes without saying that white supremacists would not have found any encouragement from President Hillary Clinton.

Immigrant fathers and mothers and their children who had worked hard for years, and tried to contribute, would not be rounded up and put in jail. President Hillary Clinton would have treated immigrants with dignity and respect, acknowledging that we comprise a nation of immigrants. Her policies would have protected the vulnerable young “Dreamers” from threats of inevitable deportation.

Trump is eviscerating protection for gay and transgender people. Our transgender soldiers are left to wonder what fate awaits them after Trump’s military transgender ban. Even the Pentagon was caught off guard and wants to slow down this ban. President Hillary Clinton would have expanded the Obama Administration’s LGBT policies.

Trump wants to eliminate funding for the arts. In his first federal budget plan, he proposed eliminating the National Endowment for the Arts, the National Endowment for the Humanities, and funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. Hillary would have committed to funding the arts. She would have never taken such draconian steps to remove a critical part of this country’s culture.

Merrick Garland, a moderate and universally respected Appeals Court Judge, who spent most of 2016 waiting in vain to be approved by the Republican-dominated Senate, would be on the Supreme Court. Instead, Senate Majority Leader McConnell’s cynical plan of delay and obstruction worked last year, and now we have Justice Neil Gorsuch, who smiled and obfuscated his way through the Senate confirmation. We now have him and his reliably extreme conservative vote for the rest of his presumably long life.

President Hillary would not have made it easier for mentally-ill people to buy guns. The rule was a response to the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in which a mentally disturbed man shot and killed 20 young children and six adults.

Trump has even rolled back the nutritional requirements for school lunches in a replay of Reagan’s “ketchup is a vegetable.” Not only does it seem that his sole focus is to dismantle Obama’s legacy, he is also erasing one of Former First Lady Michelle Obama’s signature accomplishments. Goodbye healthy school lunches, hello childhood obesity.

Trump is shredding the rules about equal pay for women, and of course, access to family planning. The funding for Planned Parenthood, which caters to the general health needs of many women, would not be in dire jeopardy.

This list could go on with more disastrous right wing policies on the environment, education and consumer protection.

Finally, we would have had our first woman president. All of our daughters and granddaughters would have seen the example of a courageous and confident woman leading our great nation. President Hillary Clinton could have forged a strong alliance with the current world’s most powerful woman, Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany. Women leaders would not have had to bear the daily indignities of working with a President who disrespects women and brags about sexual assault. The Women’s March on Washington would not have been in anger and sadness, but in joy and happiness.

May our country learn a lesson from this tragic mistake of 2016.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/what-might-have-been-in-2017-had-hillary-clinton-won_us_59c42919e4b0cdc773300f78


View user profile
Excellent Streisand piece, FT. Thanks for posting. Hard to read because it's so true, but it's just....so true.

View user profile
cheers cheers cheers cheers cheers cheers cheers

View user profile
RealLindaL wrote:Excellent Streisand piece, FT.  Thanks for posting. Hard to read because it's so true...

And because she's such a well-respected author in the fields of public policy and foreign affairs--just look at all the articles she's published in scholarly journals and academic periodicals.

She does seem to have a knack for writing fantasy. Do you have any other specimens of her writing we can compare it to?

View user profile
Deus X wrote:
RealLindaL wrote:Excellent Streisand piece, FT.  Thanks for posting. Hard to read because it's so true...

And because she's such a well-respected author in the fields of public policy and foreign affairs--just look at all the articles she's published in scholarly journals and academic periodicals.

She does seem to have a knack for writing fantasy. Do you have any other specimens of her writing we can compare it to?




Wow you really do have a problem dealing with strong women don't you dude. Must suck. I could have swore Streisand wrote Treasure of the Sierra Madre.

View user profile
Telstar wrote:
I could have swore Streisand wrote Treasure of the Sierra Madre.

Very nice! Took me a moment to get it.

View user profile
Deus X wrote:
Telstar wrote:
I could have swore Streisand wrote Treasure of the Sierra Madre.

Very nice! Took me a moment to get it.




Now that you got it keep it and try not to let it go "friend'.

View user profile

Now Jared Kushner's top secret security clearance has been revoked; Hope Hicks has admitted to telling "white lies" (could it be any other kind?), Roger Stone had direct contact with Wikileaks, not just through an intermediary as he has claimed in the past, and Mike Rogers testified he has not been instructed or enabled to proceed further on any investigation/prevention efforts on Russian interference in the election...no direction from the Orange one.

This is some seriously Orwellian doublespeak.

View user profile
Deus X wrote:
RealLindaL wrote:Excellent Streisand piece, FT.  Thanks for posting. Hard to read because it's so true...

And because she's such a well-respected author in the fields of public policy and foreign affairs--just look at all the articles she's published in scholarly journals and academic periodicals.

She does seem to have a knack for writing fantasy. Do you have any other specimens of her writing we can compare it to?

Frankly, sir, it wouldn't have made one whit's difference to me had it been written by the fish counter person at my local grocery -- though in that case it may never have seen the light of day. Nope, I don't care who wrote it -- it's just pure unvarnished truth.

View user profile
Well, Hope Hicks just resigned.

And Kushner's gotten his security clearances revoked.

Trump is becoming more and more isolated and cut off from his sources of support and comfort. Expect higher levels of Nixon-level enemies-list crazy in the next few days. You don't take things away from a baby without getting a tantrum...

View user profile

Sponsored content


Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 2]

Go to page : 1, 2  Next

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum