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

Debates Forum

  1. Standard member bill718
    Enigma
    24 May '16 08:45 / 4 edits
    Trump and Clinton's unfavorable ratings (57 percent and 52 percent respectively) are the highest in CBS News/New York Times Polls going back to 1984, when CBS began asking this question. There is not a lot of positive vibes out there. So....has the political situation in America.turned so negative, that a 3rd political party can emerge?

    http://www.cbsnews.com/news/donald-trump-and-hillary-clinton-viewed-unfavorably-by-majority-cbsnyt-poll/
  2. Standard member finnegan
    GENS UNA SUMUS
    24 May '16 09:06 / 1 edit
    http://99getsmart.com/trump-the-fascist-backdoor-backing-of-a-political-psychopath-named-hilary-clinton/

    This fun (do I mean chilling?) article refutes the claim that Trump is a fascist before eviscerating Clinton. If I had a vote, I would not be voting for Clinton and would be more than keen to see a credible third candidate. Sanders comes to mind.

    Are Trump’s verbal attacks on the practice of US multi-nationals relocating abroad to avoid US taxes and Wall Street financial houses hiding billions of the US elites’ obscene wealth in offshore tax shelters, more detrimental to ‘American values’ (as charged) than Hillary Clinton’s pandering to Wall Street while pocketing over $300,000 for each 45 minute sycophantic performance (marketed as her ‘policy lectures’ ), or her decades of actively promoting globalization – including the US job-destroying NAFTA?

    Clearly Trump currently lacks program, organization and practice that define a fascist politician. At the very worst, he parrots the general line of attack against immigrants and Muslims. So far he would just bar them from the US but not bomb them ‘to the stone-age’. This should be contrasted with the actual policies carried out by the war-criminals Clinton/Bush/Obama-Clinton. It would be hard for Donald to ‘trump’ Hillary when she threatened to ‘obliterate Iran’ and its scores of millions of citizens because of Iran’s fictitious ‘nuclear program’.


    No serious observer minimally aware of Clinton’s carnal embrace of multiple simultaneous disastrous and destructive wars in Ukraine, Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Syria and Libya, could possibly support her – unless if they are convinced that a greater danger looms on the horizon and “we have to defeat fascist Trump at all cost”? No serious democrat or wage and salaried employee can ignore Madame Clinton’s role as Wall Street’s most shameless pimp unless they ‘believe’ that a loud-mouth New York ‘fascist is worse than Wall Street’.

    The phony scaremongering about Trump’s “fascism” just serves to cover up Clinton’s most servile promotion of traitorous wars for the benefit of Israel. One should envision the thousands of desperate Syrian refugees clinging to decrepit boats in the Mediterranean when reading excerpts of Clinton’s private e-mails: According to WikiLeaks, Hillary declared that “the best way to help Israel deal with Iran’s growing nuclear capability (sic) is to help (sic) the people of Syria overthrow the regime of Bashar Assad. … The fall of the House of Assad could well ignite a sectarian war between the Shiites and the majority Sunnis of the region drawing in Iran, which, in the view of Israeli commanders would not be a bad thing for Israel and its Western allies”. Not a bad thing for Israel – but a cruel and criminal policy against a sovereign nation and multi-ethnic society. Madame Clinton followed through with these demented pronouncements, which can only be viewed as genocidal! Clinton promoted the most violent proxy war, uprooting over half of the civilian population of Syria and killing hundreds of thousands, while shredding a sovereign nation. She thus pandered to her Israeli mentors and Pluto-Zionist funders.

    To justify backing a serial war monger, a US Secretary of State who has served Israel’s interests, and a politician who has canalized her ‘feminist principles’ with Wall Street billionaires, Hillary Clinton’s smarmy supporters have had to invent an opponent who is even worse: Creating and then denouncing “Trump the Fascist” serves as a backdoor justification for supporting a proven political psychopath!
  3. 24 May '16 09:56
    Originally posted by bill718
    Trump and Clinton's unfavorable ratings (57 percent and 52 percent respectively) are the highest in CBS News/New York Times Polls going back to 1984, when CBS began asking this question. There is not a lot of positive vibes out there. So....has the political situation in America.turned so negative, that a 3rd political party can emerge?

    http://www.cbsnews.com/news/donald-trump-and-hillary-clinton-viewed-unfavorably-by-majority-cbsnyt-poll/
    What make you write off Sanders?
  4. 24 May '16 16:32
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    What make you write off Sanders?
    His self proclaimed "socialist" status, and the fact he ran in Democrat primaries, means that he would divide the typical Democrat vote making the Republican candidate winner.

    Now if the same thing happened, at the same time on the other side, such as Trump being opposed by a fourth party candidate like Cruz, who knows what could happen?
  5. Standard member Soothfast
    0,1,1,2,3,5,8,13,21,
    27 May '16 21:07
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    What make you write off Sanders?
    Sanders will not run as a 3rd party or independent candidate, and will almost certainly urge his follows to vote for Clinton by the time the convention is over in July. At that point I'll get my Green Party bumper stickers and prepare to vote for Dr. Jill Stein.
  6. 29 May '16 10:59
    Originally posted by normbenign
    His self proclaimed "socialist" status, and the fact he ran in Democrat primaries, means that he would divide the typical Democrat vote making the Republican candidate winner.

    Now if the same thing happened, at the same time on the other side, such as Drumpf being opposed by a fourth party candidate like Cruz, who knows what could happen?
    "His self proclaimed "socialist" status"
    americans agree with every single "socialist" item on his agenda

    "means that he would divide the typical Democrat vote making the Republican candidate winner."
    most likely he would also get a large number of republicans who have the brain cells to understand that 1: drumpf is not a republican. 2. they actually agree with bernie
  7. 31 May '16 18:12
    Originally posted by Zahlanzi
    "His self proclaimed "socialist" status"
    americans agree with every single "socialist" item on his agenda

    "means that he would divide the typical Democrat vote making the Republican candidate winner."
    most likely he would also get a large number of republicans who have the brain cells to understand that 1: drumpf is not a republican. 2. they actually agree with bernie
    Your ideas are biased by your own preferences, which isn't atypical or wrong. I don't have a working crystal ball, so we'll have to wait and see.
  8. 04 Jun '16 15:21
    Originally posted by bill718
    Trump and Clinton's unfavorable ratings (57 percent and 52 percent respectively) are the highest in CBS News/New York Times Polls going back to 1984, when CBS began asking this question. There is not a lot of positive vibes out there. So....has the political situation in America.turned so negative, that a 3rd political party can emerge?

    http://www.cbsnews.com/news/donald-trump-and-hillary-clinton-viewed-unfavorably-by-majority-cbsnyt-poll/
    How can candidates that are so unpopular win the nominations in a democracy? It seems to indicate a lack of democracy to me.
  9. 04 Jun '16 16:23
    Originally posted by Metal Brain
    How can candidates that are so unpopular win the nominations in a democracy? It seems to indicate a lack of democracy to me.
    Because it is not the general populace but primary voters who determine who is the candidate for the major parties.