a Trump vs Clinton United States Presidential Election in 2016
- Thread starter Charlie Don't Surf
- Start date
Necronic
Staff member
I'm just saying, Bill Ayers is literally nothing compared to this guy. He legit reads like a villain from a Tom Clancy novel. And his ties to Russia are so deep and fundamentally corrupt it makes me legit concerned.
I'm guessing there is currently some fairly serious investigative journalism going on against him right now, he seems like a PHENOMONAL liability.[DOUBLEPOST=1469721109,1469721039][/DOUBLEPOST]
And to piggyback your statement it's interesting how much the right is focusing on Hillary's corruption while completely ignoring Trumps.[DOUBLEPOST=1469721274][/DOUBLEPOST]To clarify and make this as clear as possible: Manafort has actively undermined American foreign policy with regards to Russia, and is now working with a candidate that has shown pro Russian sympathies.
This is the republican candidate?
I'm guessing there is currently some fairly serious investigative journalism going on against him right now, he seems like a PHENOMONAL liability.[DOUBLEPOST=1469721109,1469721039][/DOUBLEPOST]
Hey man if Hillary surrounded herself with anyone near as bad as Ayers or this guy I would have.
And to piggyback your statement it's interesting how much the right is focusing on Hillary's corruption while completely ignoring Trumps.[DOUBLEPOST=1469721274][/DOUBLEPOST]To clarify and make this as clear as possible: Manafort has actively undermined American foreign policy with regards to Russia, and is now working with a candidate that has shown pro Russian sympathies.
This is the republican candidate?
GasBandit
Staff member
Well, as I understand it, the Hillary platform basically boils down to "more of what Obama's been doing."
Mostly because Hillary apologists (hah, I love/hate that word so much) have been trying to paint her as pure as the driven snow, and so much better than Trump. So the conversation has mostly been about how Hillary is just as bad.
Necronic
Staff member
Nah, that's straight bullshit. Hillary is a political operative just like the rest of them and plays the game. She's got some serious dirt under her fingernails and anyone who says otherwise is lying to themselves. Here's the thing though.
Take anyone who "plays the game", and give them 10-20 years in the limelight and see what skeletons get center stage. No one comes out of that clean, and I think she's come out cleaner than most frankly.
I guarantee you give Trump 4 years and you will see what real dirt looks like.
Take anyone who "plays the game", and give them 10-20 years in the limelight and see what skeletons get center stage. No one comes out of that clean, and I think she's come out cleaner than most frankly.
I guarantee you give Trump 4 years and you will see what real dirt looks like.
GasBandit
Staff member
Trump's awful. Maybe every bit as awful as you say. But Hillary's in the same ballpark. Both belong in prison.
Necronic
Staff member
I really disagree. The key difference between them is opportunity. Hillary has had access to the highest levels of world power, and she has done some dirt, no doubt. But Trump? Trump has had much less access to power, and his list of sins is still almost as impressive as Hillary's, if not more so. And that's also taking into account the fact that he wasn't under nearly as much scrutiny as her, so god knows what he's actually done. If Hillary has a piece of corn in her shit you better believe it's on the news.
Imagine what he would do with real power?
Imagine what he would do with real power?
GasBandit
Staff member
Oh, the exact opposite is true as far as the news and Hillary. The media has been in the tank for Clintons for 25 years. Her entire political career is one of obfuscation, document shredding and destruction of evidence. This e-mail stuff is just the latest example. Remember Sandy Berger? Remember the stuff that got "lost" on her desk and then got taken away and destroyed before it could be subpoenaed? Last I heard, none of Trump's close compatriots have decided to shoot themselves in the head, then change clothes and go to the park. Commerce Secretary Ron Brown told the Clintons he would "not go down alone" in his corruption investigation and then a week later his plane crashes. The Clinton Foundation uses it's "80% overhead cost" charity sham to launder contributions from China, Saudi Arabia, and others and then Clinton turns right around and pretends to champion gay rights and women.
She's just better at hiding/covering up than the Don is because, until he started in politics, he could just pay to make whatever it was go away.
this is where the tears from laughing were too much to read the rest
please say clinton news network next, c'mon, just for ol' time's sake
GasBandit
Staff member
It's a large part of the reason why Fox took off so much. The hoi polloi were sick of the blatant, pervasive bias.
Well, they were sick of it not being their blatant, pervasive bias.
Also I feel like you meant someone other than the hoi polloi.
GasBandit
Staff member
Hoi polloi - the rabble, the common masses, the public at large, the plebes, the proles, etc.
Necronic
Staff member
I'm sorry but the idea of there being extensive obfuscation of the Clintons by the media is simply absurd. Any president is going to be under intense scrutiny. To claim otherwise you need some damned good evidence
Also are we really going back to "the Clinton's had a bunch of people murdered" stuff?[DOUBLEPOST=1469726287,1469726014][/DOUBLEPOST]And anyone who thinks Hillary has a cozy relationship with the media really doesnt follow politics as well as they think they do
Also are we really going back to "the Clinton's had a bunch of people murdered" stuff?[DOUBLEPOST=1469726287,1469726014][/DOUBLEPOST]And anyone who thinks Hillary has a cozy relationship with the media really doesnt follow politics as well as they think they do
Nobody in recent memory has such a cozy relationship with the media than Trump. He has been on all major networks daily during the campaign. Basically getting a solid hour of ad time for free, daily.
GasBandit
Staff member
He's a lot better at manipulating the media despite their will, I'll give him that.
What does this even mean?
Necronic
Staff member
I kind of mixed up "pucker your asshole" and "winking the brown eye".[DOUBLEPOST=1469728653,1469728344][/DOUBLEPOST]Oh yeah and if you're thinking that the Clintons get a pass from media why is there a literal Primer on her entire list of scandals on The Atlantic (every one of which has been pretty heavily investigated and reported on)
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics...roversies-from-whitewater-to-benghazi/396182/
It's actually a pretty cool read tbh
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics...roversies-from-whitewater-to-benghazi/396182/
It's actually a pretty cool read tbh
Is that supposed to be the opposite of "hoity-toity"?
GasBandit
Staff member
Because it's on the internet. You know when we talk about media bias, what we're talking about. Everybody doesn't drive home at the end of the day, turn on the TV and tune it to The Atlantic.
Also it categorizes everything before 2001 as "that other stuff nobody cares about because it's old."
[DOUBLEPOST=1469728976,1469728945][/DOUBLEPOST]
Effectively, yes, but it is actually real greek for "the many."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoi_polloi
Zappit
Staff member
Eh, the media bias claim is pretty bullshit this year. Anybody watch the Today Show? I recall Trump calling in every day during the primaries and getting the first ten minutes of the show most days. He got cozy, softball interviews. When they finally gave Clinton an interview, Savannah Guthrie asks her about three questions, all variations of the same question. NBC has been very friendly towards Trump. The ironic thing is that Trump would bitch about the equal coverage rules while he DOMINATED time on the morning shows.
Maybe they won't be as friendly now that he asked a foreign power to launch a cyberattack against his opponent. Yeah, he said he was joking, but it sure wasn't funny.
Maybe they won't be as friendly now that he asked a foreign power to launch a cyberattack against his opponent. Yeah, he said he was joking, but it sure wasn't funny.
As much as a I don't like defending Trump, I recall the stations regularly saying that they had an open invitation for any candidate to come on and talk, and Trump was just the only one who took advantage of it as much as he could
After everything that's happened so far, I can't exactly see how that's an unreasonable assumption, no matter who's saying it.
There has been actual rigging this election cycle (although lets be honest, probably not just this election cycle.)
But hey, gotta support the team ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I saw that, thought it was going to be interesting, went and looked. I almost wonder if those were real people on Reddit or just pre-made questions written by his people, because they 1. well organized and 2. essentially orbiting the Trump greatness.
You'd think that would at least result in straight answers, but nope. The only thing he wasn't vague about was anti-Hilary rhetoric.
Well, to be fair to Trump, that was Obama's answer to the question back before his first term, too.