Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Subscriber mchill
    cryptogram
    30 Sep '16 13:07 / 2 edits
    Donald Trump once said (paraphrased) "I could shoot someone, and not lose votes" It seems he is correct. No matter how many insults and disrespectful comments he makes, or how many lies he tells, or how poorly he does in the debates, or how much ignorance he demonstrates on issues such as foreign policy, it seems to have little effect on poll numbers, or even the the GOP in general, many people will still back him no matter what he does or says. Maybe Mr. Trump is not the real problem here. As an old comic strip once said: We have seen the enemy, and it is us.
  2. 30 Sep '16 13:26 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by mchill
    Donald Trump once said (paraphrased) "I could shoot someone, and not lose votes" It seems he is correct. No matter how many insults and disrespectful comments he makes, or how many lies he tells, or how poorly he does in the debates, or how much ignorance he demonstrates on issues such as foreign policy, it seems to have little effect on poll numbers, or even ...[text shortened]... he real problem here. As an old comic strip once said: We have seen the enemy, and it is us.
    The candidates are empty suits and dresses. They can say and do pretty much anything and still garnish votes.

    It's all about the party. Put anyone in there and they will obtain about half the vote.

    Scary, isn't it?
  3. Standard member KellyJay
    Walk your Faith
    30 Sep '16 15:01
    Originally posted by whodey
    The candidates are empty suits and dresses. They can say and do pretty much anything and still garnish votes.

    It's all about the party. Put anyone in there and they will obtain about half the vote.

    Scary, isn't it?
    It is amazing how much crap people have to overlook to be willing to accept those people. Hillary didn't shoot anyone but she didn't stop some who worked for her from getting killed then lie about it. Trump does say assine things but compared to what she is responsible for I don't think they compare.
  4. 30 Sep '16 17:22
    Originally posted by KellyJay
    It is amazing how much crap people have to overlook to be willing to accept those people. Hillary didn't shoot anyone but she didn't stop some who worked for her from getting killed then lie about it. Trump does say assine things but compared to what she is responsible for I don't think they compare.
    People demand a choice, or at least, the illusion of a choice.

    What most don't understand here is, people are simply voting because they are mad as hell.

    Anyone who then gets up and demonstrates similar feelings will get their vote. It matters little what they do or say other than promising change and to shake things up.
  5. 30 Sep '16 20:36
    Originally posted by KellyJay
    It is amazing how much crap people have to overlook to be willing to accept those people. Hillary didn't shoot anyone but she didn't stop some who worked for her from getting killed then lie about it. Trump does say assine things but compared to what she is responsible for I don't think they compare.
    Did you perhaps vote GWB in 2004?
  6. 01 Oct '16 00:49 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by KellyJay
    It is amazing how much crap people have to overlook to be willing to accept those people. Hillary didn't shoot anyone but she didn't stop some who worked for her from getting killed then lie about it. Trump does say assine things but compared to what she is responsible for I don't think they compare.
    Hillary didn't shoot anyone but she didn't stop some who worked for her from getting killed then lie about it.

    Since so many charges against Clinton have been factually debunked on here, and since you are so vague, I wonder what exactly you are referring to? On the off-chance that it is Benghazi, I link the following:

    “Perhaps Clinton’s greatest blemish on her record is the destabilizing of Libya, which led to the Benghazi diplomatic compound attack. Certainly, it was one of the career bullet points that made me despise her. But despite $7 million dollars spent on Benghazi investigations, 1,982 published pages of reports on Benghazi, 10 congressional committees participating in investigations, 3,194 questions asked in a public forum, Clinton and her administration have been found guilty of zero wrongdoing. No “stand down” call was ever found, one of the cornerstones of the Republican claims. The family of Chris Stevens—the ambassador who became the face of the Benghazi tragedy after he was killed in the siege—has publicly objected to blaming Clinton for Benghazi.”


    http://qz.com/795906/election-2016-i-wrote-that-i-despised-hillary-clinton-today-i-want-to-publicly-take-it-back/
  7. Standard member KellyJay
    Walk your Faith
    01 Oct '16 05:54 / 5 edits
    Originally posted by vistesd
    [b]Hillary didn't shoot anyone but she didn't stop some who worked for her from getting killed then lie about it.

    Since so many charges against Clinton have been factually debunked on here, and since you are so vague, I wonder what exactly you are referring to? On the off-chance that it is Benghazi, I link the following:

    “Perhaps Clinton’s greate ...[text shortened]... 906/election-2016-i-wrote-that-i-despised-hillary-clinton-today-i-want-to-publicly-take-it-back/[/b]
    No they have not been factually debunked here or anywhere else, her true believers may
    be happy with the news corps outlets who BACK her and stand up for her. The facts are
    she was in charge, they asked for help, and were denied, and she lied about events. The
    facts were she did not follow government rules and laws with email and is getting away
    with it even deleting emails under a subpoena and is getting away with it. Suggestions NO
    intent to break the law doesn't mean laws were not broken. Having a justice department
    secretly met with her husband before the chargers were done should let you know she is
    above the law. The same FBI who said that she didn't lie to them helped hide that
    meeting and later didn't question her under oath or record her answers also shows she
    will not be touched, not that she should be. She could be guilty, but she is without a
    doubt unchargeable of crimes as she is protected. This is the one you want in charge of
    the government now. You I guess reject people's testimony who where there over her
    denials, nothing about her has been debunked only carefully crafted.
  8. Subscriber Proper Knob
    Cornovii
    01 Oct '16 09:57
    Originally posted by KellyJay
    No they have not been factually debunked here or anywhere else, her true believers may
    be happy with the news corps outlets who BACK her and stand up for her. The facts are
    she was in charge, they asked for help, and were denied, and she lied about events. The
    facts were she did not follow government rules and laws with email and is getting away
    with it ...[text shortened]... y who where there over her
    denials, nothing about her has been debunked only carefully crafted.
    The facts are she was in charge, they asked for help, and were denied, and she lied about events.

    I have absolutely no horse in this race, but in the interests of me learning something, let's see if these claims of yours can can stand up to scrutiny. Present your evidence please Mr Jay.
  9. Standard member KellyJay
    Walk your Faith
    01 Oct '16 11:10
    Originally posted by Proper Knob
    [b]The facts are she was in charge, they asked for help, and were denied, and she lied about events.

    I have absolutely no horse in this race, but in the interests of me learning something, let's see if these claims of yours can can stand up to scrutiny. Present your evidence please Mr Jay.[/b]
    Here is three links about the requests for help being asked for from three different sources.

    http://www.cbsnews.com/videos/docs-show-amb-stevens-asked-for-more-security/

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/state-dept-downgraded-security-in-libya-before-deadly-attack-ex-officer-claims/2012/10/10/d7195faa-12e6-11e2-a16b-2c110031514a_story.html

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/10/19/ambassador-sought-security-staffing-before-benghazi-attack-email-shows.html

    Hillary blaming the video, even though she knew the whole time it had nothing to do with
    with the attack.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QSooz2wXpes

    Notice the caskets...this was when the families said she blamed the video and she later
    claimed they were lying. I got to tell you if she can lie to a parent right in front of their
    child's casket she will think nothing of lying to anyone else.
  10. 01 Oct '16 12:42 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by Proper Knob
    [b]The facts are she was in charge, they asked for help, and were denied, and she lied about events.

    I have absolutely no horse in this race, but in the interests of me learning something, let's see if these claims of yours can can stand up to scrutiny. Present your evidence please Mr Jay.[/b]
    Assuming that all of these allegations are false due to the vast right winged conspiracy Hilary used to talk about, the bottom line is that it was her job to ensure the safety of those men and she failed. There is no question about that. The only question becomes, how can they blame the GOP?

    It's time to stop the blame game and be accountable, something that NEVER happens in Washington DC.
  11. 01 Oct '16 16:18 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by KellyJay
    Here is three links about the requests for help being asked for from three different sources.

    http://www.cbsnews.com/videos/docs-show-amb-stevens-asked-for-more-security/

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/state-dept-downgraded-security-in-libya-before-deadly-attack-ex-officer-claims/2012/10/10/d7195faa-12e6-11e2-a16b-2c110031514a_ ...[text shortened]... a parent right in front of their
    child's casket she will think nothing of lying to anyone else.
    First, the attackers themselves stated it was about the video: http://www.redhotpawn.com/board/search.php

    —You may not have followed this thread that far; Marauder’s responses are directly to RBHill, though you made essentially the same claim as here earlier in that thread.

    Regardless, other family members have stated that Clinton did not mention a video to them: www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2016/feb/09/what-did-hillary-clinton-tell-families-people-who-/

    See also:

    http://benghazicommittee.com/benghazi-by-the-numbers/

    “The Benghazi tragedy has been investigated exhaustively and Secretary Clinton has been found guilty of no wrongdoing. Ten congressional committees have participated in the investigations into the Benghazi tragedy, which have included more than 50 senior level staff briefings, over twenty hearings, five independent/bipartisan reports, dozens of interviews, and the disclosure of at least 40,000 pages of documents, finding no evidence of any wrongdoing by Secretary Clinton.” http://benghazicommittee.com/fact-center/

    And: http://mediamatters.org/research/2016/06/28/comprehensive-guide-benghazi-myths-and-facts/211240
  12. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    01 Oct '16 16:24
    Originally posted by whodey
    Assuming that all of these allegations are false due to the vast right winged conspiracy Hilary used to talk about, the bottom line is that it was her job to ensure the safety of those men and she failed. There is no question about that. The only question becomes, how can they blame the GOP?

    It's time to stop the blame game and be accountable, something that NEVER happens in Washington DC.
    How exactly does one insure the safety of every single State Department outpost in every country from attacks by 80-150 men armed with automatic weapons, RPGs, mortars, etc. etc. etc.?
  13. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    01 Oct '16 16:34
    Originally posted by vistesd
    First, the attackers themselves stated it was about the video: http://www.redhotpawn.com/board/search.php

    —You may not have followed this thread that far; Marauder’s responses are directly to RBHill, though you made essentially the same claim as here earlier in that thread.

    Regardless, other family members have stated that Clinton did not mention a v ...[text shortened]... :http://mediamatters.org/research/2016/06/28/comprehensive-guide-benghazi-myths-and-facts/211240
    The New York Times, Reuters, NPR and other media outlets reported soon after the attacks that those who participated in it were motivated by anger over the video. The NYT article a day after the attacks stated:

    Fighters involved in the assault, which was spearheaded by an Islamist brigade formed during last year’s uprising against Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi, said in interviews during the battle that they were moved to attack the mission by anger over a 14-minute, American-made video that depicted the Prophet Muhammad, Islam’s founder, as a villainous, homosexual and child-molesting buffoon.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/13/world/middleeast/us-envoy-to-libya-is-reported-killed.html?_r=1

    See also: http://mediamatters.org/blog/2013/05/14/four-media-reports-from-libya-that-linked-the-b/194073
  14. 01 Oct '16 20:09 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by KellyJay
    It is amazing how much crap people have to overlook to be willing to accept those people. Hillary didn't shoot anyone but she didn't stop some who worked for her from getting killed then lie about it. Trump does say assine things but compared to what she is responsible for I don't think they compare.
    strikes me as some sort of latent sexism, recent history is littered with Americans being killed due to those in power not protecting them sufficiently....yet Hilary (and I'm no fan) is the only one who appears to be hated for it.
  15. Standard member KellyJay
    Walk your Faith
    01 Oct '16 20:26
    Originally posted by vistesd
    First, the attackers themselves stated it was about the video: http://www.redhotpawn.com/board/search.php

    —You may not have followed this thread that far; Marauder’s responses are directly to RBHill, though you made essentially the same claim as here earlier in that thread.

    Regardless, other family members have stated that Clinton did not mention a v ...[text shortened]... http://mediamatters.org/research/2016/06/28/comprehensive-guide-benghazi-myths-and-facts/211240
    Someone has the attackers claiming it was a due to the video, who cares!


    With respect to the other family members...it doesn't matter! She could have said it to
    some and not others. So unless you want to just assume those family members that
    claimed she did say it are liars feel free. I can see you wanting to believe Clinton over
    family members who lost loved ones since you want to accept Clinton as trustworthy.

    She didn't protect her people, she didn't call them back, she didn't add to the numbers
    of people protecting them when requested. That doesn't mean she broke a law, only
    that she failed to protect those working for her.

    With respect to all the other lies she has told over time, I'm sure you accept her word over
    others as well.