2016 Presidential Election (General Election)

Who do plan to support for President in the 2016 Election?

  • Hillary Clinton

    Votes: 38 62.3%
  • Donald Trump

    Votes: 6 9.8%
  • Gary Johnson

    Votes: 11 18.0%
  • Jill Stein

    Votes: 3 4.9%
  • Other

    Votes: 3 4.9%

  • Total voters
    61
Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't want to talk to you anymore Justin. Don't bother responding to me. You have shown your true colors as a party zealot and I don't care about your political opinions going forward.

I'm willing to call out Obama or any other Democrat. This includes the current topic. Hell, I've also already pointed out that I am to the right of the Democratic Party on specific issues that have been previously discussed in this thread. This is not zealotry.

The problem here is that you've just been entirely unable to form a coherent argument as to what you feel was done wrong and what you would do differently and as such I don't actually have anything to defend. Should someone who possesses a gun while at the same time possessing drugs with an "intent to distribute" spend the rest of his life in prison? If not, then what is the appropriate amount of time? You've ignored my very simple questions and attempts to have you clarify your stance.

Instead of having a reasonable discussion you resort to yelling (in all caps) and then retreating to your bunker. I made a point of separating you from the far right delusional posters in this thread, but you display the same lack of critical thinking.
 
Lawsuit over ACORN footage
O'Keefe has been accused of selectively editing and manipulating his recordings of ACORN employees, as well as distorting chronologies. Several journalists and media outlets have expressed regret for not properly scrutinizing and vetting his work.[18][19] In the summer of 2011, he began releasing videos of his colleagues' staged encounters with workers which he claimed showed fraud related to Medicaid applicability. Further examination concluded there was no fraud or intent to commit fraud.[20]

In 2013 O'Keefe agreed to pay $100,000 to former California ACORN employee Juan Carlos Vera for deliberately misrepresenting Mr. Vera's actions. On the basis of the selectively edited videotape which O'Keefe released, Vera appeared to be a willing participant in helping with O'Keefe's plan to smuggle young women into the United States illegally. However, authorities confirmed that Mr. Vera immediately contacted them about O'Keefe and that he had also encouraged O'Keefe to share as much information as possible about his scheme and gather further evidence of O'Keefe's purported illegal activities, which could then be used by prosecutors to bring charges against O'Keefe for attempted human trafficking. Due to O'Keefe's release of the dubiously edited video, intentionally designed to "prove" that ACORN employees were ready and willing to engage in illicit activities, Mr. Vera lost his job and was falsely accused of being engaged in human trafficking. O'Keefe noted that he "regrets any pain" caused by his reckless actions, though O'Keefe's lawyer dismissed any claimed injury incurred by Vera and stated that the payment was a "nuisance settlement".[21]

Criminal conviction (2010)
O'Keefe, along with accomplices Joseph Basel, Stan Dai, and Robert Flanagan, the son of William Flanagan, acting U.S. Attorney of the Eastern District of Louisiana at the time, were arrested in New Orleans in January 2010 during an attempt to illegally make recordings at the office of United States Senator Mary Landrieu, a Democrat. The four were apprehended, with two of them dressed as telephone repairmen.[5][22]

The four men were initially charged with malicious intent to damage the phone system, a felony.[23] O'Keefe claimed he entered Landrieu's office to investigate complaints that she was ignoring phone calls from constituents during the debate over the Affordable Care Act bill.[24] The charges in the case were reduced from a felony to a single misdemeanor count of entering a federal building under false pretenses.[25][26] O'Keefe and the others pleaded guilty on May 26. O'Keefe was sentenced to three years' probation, 100 hours of community service and a $1,500 fine. The other three men received lesser sentences.[27]
.
 
No, this I think is the initial us retaliation against Russia. I'm betting you we have some good hacked dirt on Russia and we are now slowly letting targeted entities see the dirt we have on them. Let's say we show Ecuador proof that assange is a russian agent coupled with some russian official caught talking shit about how Ecuador is so willing to shoulder their burden and say how dense they must be. Suddenly, Ecuador decides assange needs to get off the internet and stop causing them humiliation.

That bank that just dropped RT accounts? We probably showed them that it was dirty money from sanctioned individuals. Expect more fun! GO USA stand up to them aggressive assholes! USA really does have a backbone!
 
Am I the only one who reads international news outlets... as many as possible that are published in English in nations that are U.S. friendly or neutral? Seriously. Check rudaw English (iraqi Kurdistan), check bbc (england), check france24(france), south china morning post (Hong Kong), the China post (Taiwan). Seriously. Try it. Boils U.S. politics down to simply their reactions.

Example: http://www.chinapost.com.tw/commentary/china-post/special-/2016/10/13/480924/Why-people.htm this is how they look at our politics in Taiwan. Meanwhile on Rudaw the Kurds love Hillary for giving them credit for being our best ally in the middle east, defying Turkish demands that we treat them as "terrorists"
 
The problem here is that you've just been entirely unable to form a coherent argument as to what you feel was done wrong and what you would do differently and as such I don't actually have anything to defend. Should someone who possesses a gun while at the same time possessing drugs with an "intent to distribute" spend the rest of his life in prison? If not, then what is the appropriate amount of time? You've ignored my very simple questions and attempts to have you clarify your stance.

First of all, my problem with you is the way you rabidly defend the criminals who Obama is letting out. Over 2 million people are incarcerated. The best way to start fixing that is to eliminate the lowest level penalties, like possession of pot, and release all of those people. Instead, Obama is releasing hundreds of cogs in the drug trafficking network, many with violent histories. (actually at least 15% with felony gun charges when adding in the 100+ from previous months) This doesn't make a dent into the problem, and these are not the lowest level people who deserve clemency.

Do you think that all of these charges are taken in a vacuum? Is everybody a first time offender? Would you agree that multiple offenses warrants increasingly harsher penalties?

How many people's lives can be ruined by just 100 doses of heroin or meth? (the "floor" of many of these charges) How many people become hooked for life? How many OD and die? How many promising futures are derailed? How many homeless people on the streets started their path to that after meeting one of Obama's pardoned criminals? I'm sure the mother of a child who overdosed on some of these harder drugs would want to keep the criminals that brought it into their lives behind bars.

You, on the other hand, seem to have a lot of sympathy for the people who have ruined cities, towns, neighborhoods... You also seem to have a lot of sympathy for people who had illegal, untraceable guns in the process of committing these crimes. Why have an untraceable gun if you wouldn't be willing to use it? Every single one of those people is a threat for homicide.

All that Obama is doing here is helping sow more chaos in the streets. How many drug traffickers are going to find useful jobs and contribute to society? How many are going to resume trafficking hard drugs and ruining more lives?

The point is, there was a reason why these people were sentenced the way they were. We don't know if they were 10th time offenders, or if they actually pleaded down from worse charges, or what kind of unreported damage they left in their wake.

All I know is I'd rather not be on the side that seems to put criminals' rights (again, not small time possessing charges) ahead of the rights of their victims, or future victims, or police. Just one more reason for me not to vote Democrat. For those of you who do, like Justin, I hope all these animals are sent to your neighborhood, even though we know they probably won't be.

I will admit though, I'm impressed with the spin you use to defend putting 700+ hardened criminals back into the drug network. Personally, I think the President should have better things to do and other issues to worry about, but let's make sure that all the drug dealers come to the front of the line for their second chance!!!!! Seriously, your party's priorities are so out of whack and your defense of them only drives me further away.
 
Last edited:
Peering inside the brain with MRI scans, researchers at University College London found that self-described conservative students had a larger amygdala than liberals. The amygdala is an almond-shaped structure deep in the brain that is active during states of fear and anxiety. Liberals had more gray matter at least in the anterior cingulate cortex, a region of the brain that helps people cope with complexity....

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-human-beast/201104/conservatives-big-fear-brain-study-finds

Just saying.
 
First of all, my problem with you is the way you rabidly defend the criminals who Obama is letting out.

I didn't read past this first sentence. "Rabidly"? For fuck sake, man, I haven't defended anyone. Go back and find an example of my rabid defenses. You will not be able to. You are literally imagining things. For at least the third time now I will restate my question: What specific sentence reductions do you disagree with? Point to one sentence reduction that should not have happened. This is not rhetoric. This is a question that needs to be answered if you want to have an adult conversation. Once you point out something you disagree with I can then either agree or disagree with you. I can then either defend the president or the criminal or disagree with the action. As this currently stands you have given me nothing to defend or not defend.

I've had some ridiculous conversations on the internet, but wow. I've wasted enough time on this. You're too angry and set on your narrative to even participate in a simple back and forth. If you can afford to, take a vacation. Go relax and look at the ocean for a while.
 
I didn't read past this first sentence....... For at least the third time now I will restate my question: What specific sentence reductions do you disagree with? Point to one sentence reduction that should not have happened. This is not rhetoric. This is a question that needs to be answered if you want to have an adult conversation.

Maybe next time you should try reading past the first sentence. Yet you respond acting like I never answered you, after ignoring my answer. That's ridiculous.

Let's turn this around: Which ones do you agree with? Do you know the past histories of all these people? Do you know if they had prior convictions? Do you know if they already plead down to lesser charges? Do you know how many people have been hurt or had their lives ruined due to having these drug traffickers in their neighborhood? Can you vouch for each criminal who is being released, or are you taking all this in a vacuum based only on the blurbs you read?

For me, I don't have enough information to answer your questions because I don't know the backgrounds of these people. I just think a President should have better things to do than release over 700 members of a drug trafficking network, at least 15% with proven violent histories. I guess I'd rather see a President's efforts be expended elsewhere, and helping high level drug dealers get a second chance isn't an issue I prioritize as a voter.
 
We'll never be rid of Kerry until his body is actually rotting.... He's got a lot of dirt on everybody ever since being handed the torch by Tip O'neill....

Of course the Clinton's are even worse. We'll never be rid of them either. And they have this massive communist propaganda machine called the Clinton News Net, MSDNC, America's commie newspapers and millions upon millions of proletariat who want endless fairness (free shit).
 
We'll never be rid of Kerry until his body is actually rotting.... He's got a lot of dirt on everybody ever since being handed the torch by Tip O'neill....

Of course the Clinton's are even worse. We'll never be rid of them either. And they have this massive communist propaganda machine called the Clinton News Net, MSDNC, America's commie newspapers and millions upon millions of proletariat who want endless fairness (free shit).

I used to think a lot like you and then I realized how much of a fearful and angry raging lunatic asshole I came across as.
 
I'm done reading this thread.

I think we'd all be best served as a community if we all drop it. There are lots of other outlets on the internet for this stuff, we don't have to do this on aB.
 
It acts as a good release valve. People used to try to force a lot of this stuff into active project threads.

That said, I wouldn't blame anyone for avoiding this thread like the plague. I only drop in here out of morbid curiosity.
 
I like this thread, it gives everybody a chance to see people's true colors if not otherwise known. Like the songs on the jukebox used for profiling purposes in Talladega Nights, only slightly different
 
I was listening on CNN about some guy discussing voter fraud with a group of panelists saying it was impossible to commit massive voter fraud and would never happen. Naturally some democrat analyst.

I wish I was on the panel. I would have looked at him do you remember how Bush stole the election from Gore. They didn't even count the votes for Florida.

Dimple Chads.

Of course the elections are rigged. We have dead people voting.

Bottom line:
Hollywood, Washington are the same---A bunch of phony people the only difference at this point is Washington has stolen a lot of money from the working class American family.

20 Trillion dollar National Debt
100+Trillion in unfunded Liabilties
Bailouts---To corporate companies like GE, Goldman Sachs,
Stimulus packages to the unions for their votes.
Monsanto & Coke poisoning our children as these Govt Pigs give no accountability

The game is rigged for the hard-working American Family. Like your so called hero Elizabeth warren claims. But she continues to support Criminals for president which shows she has no Moral spine just part of the IN CROWD.

You really believe TRUMP is the problem? More like our corrupt elected officials belong in prison with Child molesters.
 
Last edited:
I like this thread, it gives everybody a chance to see people's true colors.....

Ehhh, "true colors" can still change. 4 years ago I would have been accepted among you as a rank and file Democrat. Now I come across as a Republican, but am really more of a "Devil's Advocate" Independent. I'm not a huge fan of either party and fear seeing one or the other entrenched in power for too long of a period. There is no balance without the swinging pendulum.

Right now my front runner for President is Tom Brady. He will sew up my vote with 2 more strong performances and a pair of road wins against Pittsburgh and Buffalo. I'm not sure if I could stomach voting for anybody else.

In the poll up top, I picked "other".
 
an enlightened one's attempts to scold a true deplorable in 3... 2... 1...

I used to think a lot like you and then I realized how much of a fearful and angry raging lunatic asshole I came across as.

....as opposed to all the angry lunatics that permeate Hollywood and Boston. :)

btw, i hate deficit spending even more than the angry lunatic asshole i come across as.

In other words, i'm not offended by people who object to other people who believe a nation should pay for the shit it buys as it goes....

i know... it's crazy. But, i'd prefer elected government just admit to the people: "this is how much money we have.... and if we want more, we'll just have to tax you all into oblivion."

instead of buying future votes by simply looting the treasury.

i know what abject extremism it is to think such lunaticky things. even to the point of arguing it until all you political pilgrims have forgotten what we're, in fact, arguing about – and it all just comes across as hate, instead.
 
Last edited:
Conservatives and libertarians' views of monetary policy is dangerous and hypocritical.

1) money's value is arbitrary. print away, please. what matters is the trend of u.s. currency value versus global benchmarks. that's it. "we're overspending" is meaningless in absolute terms. it only matters in relative terms. So yes, I am concerned about a deficit that is growing, and yes I would like us to balance the budget, but no I don't care about whether there is deficit in the first place

2) Hypocrisy: they want the U.S. government to be savers not spenders, but then they want the american public to be spenders at all costs. They want people to put their money into corporations (either through consumerism or the stock market), not FDIC ensured bank accounts or their mattress. So the people have to choose among bad things (low/no interest situations, buying junk from companies, or buying toilet water stocks)...
How about this? The government pay down debts by issuing high yield bonds (gee, what a concept, it's how we funded world war II)...we could source much of the money we needed from our own people, while giving them a chance to save...but NOOOO, we could never do this because it would detract from free market participation. Think about it: an entirely voluntary bond purchase program - and ask yourself why big business lobbies against it (and wins).
 
Conservatives and libertarians' views of monetary policy is dangerous and hypocritical.

1) money's value is arbitrary. print away, please. what matters is the trend of u.s. currency value versus global benchmarks. that's it. "we're overspending" is meaningless in absolute terms. it only matters in relative terms. So yes, I am concerned about a deficit that is growing, and yes I would like us to balance the budget, but no I don't care about whether there is deficit in the first place

2) Hypocrisy: they want the U.S. government to be savers not spenders, but then they want the american public to be spenders at all costs. They want people to put their money into corporations (either through consumerism or the stock market), not FDIC ensured bank accounts or their mattress. So the people have to choose among bad things (low/no interest situations, buying junk from companies, or buying toilet water stocks)...
How about this? The government pay down debts by issuing high yield bonds (gee, what a concept, it's how we funded world war II)...we could source much of the money we needed from our own people, while giving them a chance to save...but NOOOO, we could never do this because it would detract from free market participation. Think about it: an entirely voluntary bond purchase program - and ask yourself why big business lobbies against it (and wins).

Income inequality is at a dangerous level in this country. What keeps this balanced is Interest rates: Value of your Labor through the dollar.
(This is how you create slaves) Print money endless amounts of money backed by nothing and demoralize the American public with unlimited amounts of debt.

The cost of having a family and sending your children to college is completely out of control. Hard Working class people that have average jobs cannot afford to send children to schools. WHY? ---- But our Govt say's NO INFLATION?
I hear statements saying well they need to educate themselves to get a better job. MAYBE ---but the reality is the people in our Govt are making life so expensive that they are destroying the American Family by demoralizing the family for working for Peanuts on the dollar.

Not sure if anybody will understand this. But the point is Interest rates pinned to zero for the bankers that never have to file bankruptcy has broken the system. There was not a natural cleansing in the capitalistic system when you have one group that gets bailed out. (LOSERS)
You continue to keep the losers running the system and that is why America is losing its world power status

This is what is creating income inequality where the people in power are stealing the productive class of American working class by not raising interest rates and creating better buying power for the American Families.

American Families Buying Power (is Stronger with Higher Interest rates)
Cost of living is cheaper) Income inequality is stronger since the productive class is rewarded
VS
Low Interest rates only creates cheap money for the bankers/Corporations & the people that can get the useless car loans and demoralizes the American family and creates bad income inequality throughout the nation.
Cheap money helps create bad products from our corporations.

So To Sum Up....
"We are in an Era Of Fascism....Right Now....
It's not just at the macro level...But at the micro level as well....and worldwide.....
The coming election may well nail this point down in the next few weeks......"

Hilary Clinton is Fascist
I'm not saying Trump is an Angel but if you like slavery vote Clinton.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top