Archief - Presidentsverkiezingen VS - deel 2

TLF zei:

Lol, ik hoef niks te geloven het staat in hun eigen emails.

Klik om te vergroten...

Je hoeft het niet groter te maken dan het is dit is waarschijnlijk gewoon een soort cosplay die ze doen (maar dan een pak extremer). Waarom moet mannelijk zaad altijd een hoofdrol eisen in de Clinton verhalen.

Klik om te vergroten...

k995 zei:

Je verzint er vrolijk alles bij hoor.


Er is geen verhaal, zoveelste onzin.

Klik om te vergroten...

Shotterke zei:

Dit lijstje mist nog een pak zaken natuurlijk en hij heeft dan natuurlijk nog honderden cases waar hij gesettled heeft en waar we geen details over weten.

Edit:
https://www.reddit.com/r/EnoughTrum...final_response_to_the_tell_me_why_trump_is_a/

Hier zullen er ook nog wel een paar staan die niet in de lijst staan.

Klik om te vergroten...

Lakigigar zei:

Ondertussen polls status/quo. 65/35 kans volgens 538, en national vote voorsprong lijkt op :+- 3 procent te zitten.

Klik om te vergroten...

Polis zei:

Omdat angst goed verkoopt en schaapjes stil houdt.

Klik om te vergroten...

Polis zei:

We moeten die feestelijkheden hier wat organiseren eigenlijk.
Eregast: K995

Dat allemaal in 1 jaar zeg, de Brexit, nu Trump.
Establishment krijgt op hun kloten.

Klik om te vergroten...

SinDweller zei:

Ik zou toch niet te vroeg juichen, al acht ik het zeker waarschijnlijker dan een week geleden. In de laatste election map van RCP staat Trump wel op 164 tegenover 216 voor Clinton (was eerder nog 180), hij doet het wel beter in de tossups maar toch...

Klik om te vergroten...

Oldskooler zei:

Trump is necessary evil.

Zoveel beerputten zijn langs alle kanten opengetrokken, zoveel doorzichtige hypocrisie en gemanipuleer overal opgedoken.

Ook al haalt hij het niet, de visie op de politiek en de wereld is wel veranderd bij velen.

De heiligen zijn niet heilig, hij heeft ze ferm uit hun kot gelokt en doen vallen over de eigen voeten

Klik om te vergroten...

Polis zei:

En de term corporate media kent nu iedereen. Herinner me een jaar of twee terug dat ik hier letterlijk werd uitgelachen bij het gebruiken van die term.

Klik om te vergroten...

zarathustra zei:

Onzin, er geen twee partij systeem er is een first past the post systeem. Als mensen die geen van beide willen niet gaan stemmen of (veel beter) op gelijk wie anders stemmen dan valt dat op termijn uiteen. De realiteit is natuurlijk dat de meesten dom en lui zijn.

( noot: uiteraard is dit iets dat moet beginnen op het lokale vlak)

Klik om te vergroten...

TLF zei:

Bewijs graag?

Klik om te vergroten...

k995 zei:

Waarom? Elke post die een argument inhoud negeer je toch:

https://www.beyondgaming.be/archive....118/presidentsverkiezingen-vs-deel-2.1051789

Antwoord gerust daarop want ook die post was onzin die je uitkraamde.

Klik om te vergroten...

However, Braverman does have an interesting history of his own. He was once considered the possible source of an anonymous statement made to Ron Fournier “to follow the money” and find the real Hillary Clinton scandal, according to an email exchange leaked by WikiLeaks.

Klik om te vergroten...

k995 zei:

Het systeem in de VS is gericht op 2 partijen, zowat alle regels daarvoor geschreven.

Klik om te vergroten...

zarathustra zei:

Welke regels? Enige dat echt een vastgelegde regel is is hun first past the post systeem en dat kan perfect tot meer dan 2 partijen leiden.

Klik om te vergroten...

The Commission on Presidential Debates may sound like an impartial, public body, but it is actually a private organization run by the Democratic and Republican parties. When these two establishment parties took over the debates in 1989, the League of Women Voters withdrew its sponsorship, rightly observing that the “unprecedented control” demanded by the Democrats and Republicans would make the debates “campaign-trail charades” that would “perpetrate fraud on the American voter”.

Klik om te vergroten...

‘A Fraud on the American Voter’

Fed up with the League’s independence, the two parties hatched a plan. In 1987, they created the Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD), with the Democratic and Republican chairmen serving as the organization’s co-chairs.

In the 1988 election, the major party candidates quickly agreed to participate in CPD-sponsored debates, effectively sidelining the League.

The resulting debates were “phony, part of an unconscionable fraud,” said CBS anchorman Walter Cronkite.

It’s “a charade,” said CNN’s Bernard Shaw, “these were not debates.”

It’s “a fraud on the American voter,” said the League, which ceased involvement so as to avoid “becoming an accessory to the hoodwinking of the American public.”

Klik om te vergroten...

Corporate Money

With the civic-minded League out, money poured in. Anheuser-Bush and Philip Morris, among other corporations, provided large donations, and in return were featured prominently at the CPD debates.

When George Farah - author of No Debate, an expose of the CPD - asked about the propriety of beer and tobacco companies sponsoring presidential debates, Frank Fahrenkopf replied:

Boy, you are talking to really the wrong guy. I’m a guy who represents the gambling industry.
But Fahrenkopf doesn’t just represent gambling interests, he’s also the Republican CPD co-chair, a position he’s held since CPD’s inception nearly thirty years ago.

Fahrenkopf’s Democratic counterpart, McCurry, is also a lobbyist. After serving as Bill Clinton’s press secretary, McCurry went on to lobby for, among others, telecoms seeking to kill net neutrality.

The other 15 CPD board members are mostly party insiders and donors.

This (bi)partisan board, along with the two major party nominees, serves as gatekeeper to the presidential debates every four years.

Klik om te vergroten...

I really hope you do not become the first female president.

I write this not because I am some crazy, right-wing, anti-feminist conspirator; I hope you are not our first female president because it would be a disgrace to that title and a disgrace to all of the young women in our country who aspire to actually do some good for our nation.

Many people believe you are the best candidate for the position because you have been doing this political thing for a while—but when was the last time that you were able to relate to the common American?

You grew up in the rich white suburbs of Chicago as a young child and attended Yale. You then went on to ride Bill’s coattails all the way to your Senate seat as a former First Lady. Any true feminist would look at you and see that you are a fraud.

You get on your soapbox and claim that every woman who is a victim of sexual assault should be heard—but what about Juanita Broaddrick? Carolyn Moffet? Paula Corbin? Sara Allen-James? Christy Zercher? Kathleen Willey? Monica Lewinsky? All women who were sexually harassed or exploited by your husband.

Yet you stand by him continuously, defending him and helping clean up his messes. If you ask me, that’s not very appealing to me as a woman. You also stood by him after he openly admitted to having “sexual relations” with Monica. That sounds like a very conservative stand by my man move if you ask me.

If you were as independent as you portray yourself to be, why didn’t you just leave Bill? Because you needed his political access to get your foot in the door.

All of that aside, the sheer fact that you allowed four Americans to perish in Benghazi and then proceeded to later ask, “what difference does it make?” proves to me that you don’t care about American lives. Those were four American men who died. Four families in our country that suffered a loss. Four mothers that had to bury their sons.

“What difference does it make?”

“Because it’s not just a detail if it’s your kid, if it’s your family. It’s a big deal. And it should be a big deal to your president, too.”

A detail to you, former Secretary—but to those families, a huge difference.

Not to mention you want to allow all of these refugees in. Don’t get me wrong: I am a humanitarian. However, I, as an American citizen, am guaranteed safety as well as the safety of my future children and grandchildren in the Preamble of the Constitution of the United States.

The one thing, if nothing else, that you as someone running for President of the United States should uphold. I understand that we should help people, but at the end of the day, would Syria do the same for us? In our time of crisis it is our job first and foremost, and yours, to ensure our own citizen’s safety.

You use your platform of charitable humanitarian but now we are learning the extent to which your foundation is a fraud. It’s nothing but a money-laundering business that you can catch a tax break from.

Which, by the way, is a wee bit illegal.

You took up monetary donations after the Haiti earthquake and, yes, you did build a textile factory—on the opposite side of Haiti that wasn’t even affected by the earthquake. You also conveniently signed off Uranium to be given to Russia just after Uranium One shareholders deposited $145 million in donations to the Clinton Foundation. How thoughtful of them.

You also claim to be against big business and fight all the big bad business bullies, but you’re in bed with them!

Your daughter is, too. Your daughter married a former investor for Goldman Sachs. Your family managed to help spend some odd $3 million on their wedding. Wonder where that money really came from.

You claim to be a friend of the black community and that you’re going to help bring them out of poverty. Look around! You are a part of the administration that has left them where they are and you have no intentions of changing that. You want control. Your mentor Saul Alinsky taught you that.

You don’t know any struggle or strife. You are the epitome of “white privilege.” You traipse around in heinous $12,000 suits and preach about how you are for the people—how you are going to pull them out of poverty as you attend events where you give 20-minute speeches to the tune of $500,000 and eat $800 plates of food on your private plane.

You have never faced financial strife. What makes you think you can help fix our national debt crisis?

Above all things, if nothing else, the reason why I hope you don’t become the first female president is because you are a criminal. It does not matter if you didn’t intentionally use a server that was not secure. I may not intentionally go 55 in a 40 but the police officer is going to give me a ticket. I may not intentionally kill someone in a car accident; however, I can still go down for manslaughter. People don’t intentionally become drug addicts but you bet they still end up in prison for possession.

You think you are above the law. You manipulate the system, which is not what a leader does. It’s not right.

I am not some right-wing conspiracy theorist lunatic. I simply look at the facts.

These facts tell me that I wouldn’t let you look after my pet rock, much less this nation.



Yours truly,

A Real Future Female Leader

Klik om te vergroten...

zarathustra zei:

Welke regels? Enige dat echt een vastgelegde regel is is hun first past the post systeem en dat kan perfect tot meer dan 2 partijen leiden.

Klik om te vergroten...

TLF zei:

Welk gedeelte (je verandert wel van onderwerp)?

Klik om te vergroten...

Hoe gaat ze dan afgeraken van al die (Trump fanaten/Leakers/Russische spionnen) bij de FBI?

Klik om te vergroten...

Eer ik iets post heb ik al zeker tientallen "conspiracy theories" als de bovenstaande niet serieus genomen (ondanks dat terugkijkend veel theorieën gewoon klopten).

Klik om te vergroten...

Ik weet nog dat de hele media Clinton haar serverproblemen als een security review hadden afgedaan en dat er absoluut geen "classified information" opstond. Terwijl we moeten geloven dat de KGB de FBI heeft kunnen infiltreren (Het is niet de McDonalds waar je moet binnen geraken).

Klik om te vergroten...