3 debate wins in a row for Madam Hillary.So proud of her and cant wait for her to be my next President.
Fear and loathing in Las Vegas
- Thread starter nitro
- Start date
Be careful . . .there's still Nov 8th to go and Donald Trump is still the leader of the opposition.
So glad he couldn't stalk her around the stage tonight.I was concerned for her safety in that second debate.
- Drudge Poll HERE
- Washington Times Poll HERE
- Right Daily Poll HERE
- FiveNews Online Poll HERE
- The Horn News Poll HERE
- Fox 61 Poll HERE
- Fox5 San Diego Poll HERE
- Fox 13 Utah Poll HERE
- Fox 6 Milwaukee Poll HERE
- Locker Dome Poll HERE
- New Jersey dot Com Poll HERE ←
- KPLC Poll HERE
- Heat Street Poll HERE
- Hollywood Gossip Poll HERE
- Breitbart Media Poll HERE ←
- Political Opinion Poll HERE
- Fox Hartford Online Poll HERE
- Right Scoop Poll HERE
- Fox6 Milwaukee Poll HERE
- WHNTNews Poll HERE
- Mediaite Poll HERE
- PolitOpinion Poll HERE
- Heavy Dot Com Poll HERE
- The Morning Call Poll HERE
- Florida Today Poll Here
- Alabama Dot com Poll HERE
- Conservative Firing Line Poll Here
- Conservative Outfitters Poll HERE
- JC Post Poll HERE
Said no real man ever.
I forget where I saw it, In January when the FED was on track to raise four times, I saw this sort of analysis often:
http://money.cnn.com/2016/01/26/news/economy/us-economy-recession-chance/
Today we see "the odds"being stretched out over the coming years because the FED has gone dovish again. In spite of that dovishness, lots of key stocks are rolling over that show a super weak consumer.
I rate a 2017/18 recession at near certainty with my current model.
About those 17 intel agencies who all agree.....
Hillary Clinton blames high-up Russians for WikiLeaks releases
PolitiFact - 9 hours ago
"We have 17 intelligence agencies, civilian and military, who have all concluded that these ..."
Politifact states in their article that what Cankles said is true because even though there is no independent review of the 17 agencies, some high up intel guy in gov't says it's true.
But what do others have to say.
"While the US political-media establishment has uncritically stated the allegation as fact, a MIT expert, professor Theodore Postol, has written that there is “no technical way that the US intelligence community could know who did the hacking if it was done by sophisticated nation-state actors.” Instead, Cohen suggests, the charges, leveled daily by the Clinton campaign as part of its McCarthyite Kremlin-baiting of Donald Trump, are mostly political, and he laments the way US intelligence officials have permitted themselves to be used for this unprofessional purpose."--- stephen cohen writing at Thenation magazine.
And as most of us know, Thenation mag is a left wing outfit.
Hillary Clinton blames high-up Russians for WikiLeaks releases
PolitiFact - 9 hours ago
"We have 17 intelligence agencies, civilian and military, who have all concluded that these ..."
Politifact states in their article that what Cankles said is true because even though there is no independent review of the 17 agencies, some high up intel guy in gov't says it's true.
But what do others have to say.
"While the US political-media establishment has uncritically stated the allegation as fact, a MIT expert, professor Theodore Postol, has written that there is “no technical way that the US intelligence community could know who did the hacking if it was done by sophisticated nation-state actors.” Instead, Cohen suggests, the charges, leveled daily by the Clinton campaign as part of its McCarthyite Kremlin-baiting of Donald Trump, are mostly political, and he laments the way US intelligence officials have permitted themselves to be used for this unprofessional purpose."--- stephen cohen writing at Thenation magazine.
And as most of us know, Thenation mag is a left wing outfit.
I'm trying to figure out if you support Trump or Clinton or neither
I originally supported the Bern. I support Elizabeth Warren. In fact, I am thinking of moving to Massachusetts. To me, the US is lagging behind Nordic countries in political science as if people mattered.
I have never understood this party loyalty people have. To me it is like going to the zoo - I love going to see the big cats, and I love going to see the elephants, etc. I love the animals, but I hate zoos because animals should be free roaming in their natural habitats.
What I am trying to say is, given this binary choice, Clinton is a far more capable captain, on average when all important points are taken into consideration to steer the aircraft carrier that is the US. But I hate the system. I like the animals, I hate the zoo.
The most appealing thing to a Bernie Sanders supporter about Trump is his change message. Washington has been so dysfunctional for at least since the Reagan administration as far as the poor and middle class is concerned, that the country is at a breaking point from the fever pitch anger. The most appealing thing to me about Trump, by a mile, is his ruthless adherence to the truth when it comes to the way he does business.
- When Clinton accuses Trump of buying Chinese steel, Trump comes back brutally honestly and says, you have thirty five years to make the laws, and you are the reason I make this choice. Further, the people backing you, who own you, will want you to make similar laws that fuck the American people just like I did.
- When Clinton says he hasn't payed [Federal] taxes in umpteen number of years, Trump comes back and says, yes, I took advantage of the laws that bought politicians like you offered the Real Estate lobby, the same people that are backing you, to fuck the American people some more.
Devastating arguments. Inescapable logic. Truth to the point of self-mutilation. This is a candidate. But then come the "howevers", and in Trump's case, they are devastating. There are so many problems that it has filled tens of thousands of posts on this site.
Who do I support? In an ideal world, I support the candidate that is not bought, and has the average person in mind when making policy. I support a candidate that both wants to push the frontiers of progressive thinking, and at the same time remembers that there real people with families that this or that policy hurt or help. I support a candidate that encourages open discussions - I want to see how the sausage is made. I support a candidate that wants peace above all else, but doesn't back down from bullies and confronts them head on with extreme force. I support a candidate that respects people that disagree with them, and tries to walk in their shoes. A leader that unites by addition, not subtraction.
In this election, I support Clinton. If she weren't bought and she weren't above the law, I would support her forcefully. As it is, she reminds me more of English royalty than one of us - Queen Clinton.
Last edited: