Jump to content

2016 American Presidential Thread 🇺🇸


spazz

Recommended Posts

Ulizos, what are you trying to say? That there has been donations from countries with a questionable record on human rights. Some of those countries that have donated money have weapon deals with the U.S. among other countries. This is exactly the tactic I was talking about. You link unrelated things to paint a picture that makes it appear as if those things were related because of some wrongdoing. And I repeat, just because things look suspicious this does not mean something illegal happened. UNLESS you have evidence that those were shady deals. McCarthy would be really proud of all those allegations. GUILTY BY SUSPICION.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why don't you guys mention the 10-25 million dollar donations the organization received from Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States? The biggest donations the organization received. You know, these same people (THIS ARTICLE IS FROM MARCH)

Saudi’s Exploding Christmas Gifts From Hillary Clinton

2016-03-03-1457020566-7184760-SaudiChris

Co-authored by Rebecca Green, CODEPINK D.C. office coordinator

As Hillary Clinton emerges as the front-runner for the Democratic Party’s presidential candidate, she is receiving increased scrutiny for her years as Secretary of State. Many are criticizing her hawkish foreign policy, which is the best indication of what President Hillary’s foreign policy would be, with many focusing on her long relationship with Saudi Arabia.

On Christmas Eve in 2011, Hillary Clinton and her closest aides celebrated a $29.4 billion sale of over 80 F-15 fighter jets, manufactured by U.S.-based Boeing Corporation, to Saudi Arabia. In a chain of enthusiastic emails, an aide exclaimed that it was “not a bad Christmas present.”

These are the very fighter jets the Saudis have been using to intervene in the internal affairs of Yemen since March 2015. A year later, at least 2,800 Yemeni civilians have been killed, mostly by airstrikes—and there is no end in sight. The indiscriminate Saudi strikes have killed journalists and ambulance drivers. They have hit the Chamber of Commerce, facilities supported by Médecins Sans Frontières (also known as Doctors Without Borders), a wedding hall, and a center for the blind. The attacks have also targeted ancient heritage sites in Yemen. International human rights organizations are saying that the Saudi-led strikes on Yemen may amount to war crimes.

During her tenure as Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton made weapons transfers to the Saudi government a “top priority,” according to a new report published in The Intercept. While Clinton’s State Department was deeply invested in getting weapons to Saudi Arabia, the Clinton Foundation accepted millions of dollars in donations from both the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the weapons manufacturer Boeing. Christmas presents were being gifted all around.

Despite the brutal attacks on Yemen and egregious domestic human rights violations, Saudi Arabia remains the number one U.S. ally in the Arab world. While the original U.S. interest was to secure Saudi’s vast oil reserves, today only 10% of oil used in the United States now comes from the Kingdom. U.S. dependence on Saudi oil has been superseded by U.S. dependence on weapons sales. The most recent Saudi weapons deal was made in November 2015, a deal worth $1.29 billion that included 22,000 smart and general purpose bombs, and over 5,000 Joint Direct Attack Munitions kits to convert older bombs into precision-guided weapons using GPS signals. The Pentagon’s Defense Security Cooperation Agency justified the sales, saying they helped “sustain strong military-to-military relationships between the United States and Saudi Arabia.”

It’s hard to exaggerate the enormity and high-tech nature of Saudi weapons purchases; the sales in the decade of 2010 constitute the most enormous military sales in history. According to a White House press release in 2014, “The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is the largest U.S. Foreign Military Sales customer, with active and open cases valued at approximately $97 billion, as Saudi forces build capabilities across the full spectrum of regional challenges.” The weapons include F-15 bombers, Apache and Blackhawk helicopters, missile defense systems, missiles, bombs, armored vehicles, and related equipment and services. Weapons manufacturers such as Boeing, Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics and McDonnell Douglas have been unapologetically pushing these sales to offset military spending cuts in the United States and Europe.

While the U.S. government continues to provide massive amounts of weapons to Saudi, on February 25 the European Union took the extraordinary step of voting for an EU-wide arms embargo to Saudi Arabia; while non-binding, it is a powerful statement that will put pressure on all European governments. Already, government committees in England have urged Prime Minister David Cameron to suspend arms sales to Saudi Arabia; Germany has pledged to review all future arms sales to the Kingdom; and in Belgium the government has denied an export license to ship weapons to the country. Canadian activists are also pressuring their government in light of Canada’s $15 billion transaction with Riyadh for weaponized armored vehicles, the biggest manufacturing export deal ever struck in Canada.

U.S. activists must follow the example of our European allies and demand that our government stop supplying the Saudi rulers with weapons to bomb civilians in Yemen and repress its own citizens. Join CODEPINK for the Summit on Saudi Arabia March 5-6 to learn more and get involved. If you can’t make it in person, watch the livestream at www.therealnews.com.

Medea Benjamin is the co-founder of the peace group CODEPINK and the human rights organization Global Exchange. She is the author of eight books, including one about Saudi Arabia coming out in a few months.

Rebecca Green is the D.C. office coordinator at CODEPINK. She is a student at Northeastern University with a sociology degree and a minor in women’s gender and sexuality studies.

Who cares. What difference does it really make at this point..except to you Pud, Sloane and orange skunk lovers?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a huge conflict of interest. Period. And it's been reported for a while now. Whether or not Trump decided to use this to improve his poll numbers is irrelevant.

Bush did the same. So it's irrelevant. Period.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course not. But trying to use is against Clinton, while Republican did the same, is quite HYPOCRITE if you ask me.

And don't roll your eyes at me, Uli.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I were a die-hard Bush supporter then yes, call me a hypocrite, but why call me a hypocrite when I just have better standards from my politicians?

This is exactly why so many of us Democrats aren't going to go out and vote in November.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I were a die-hard Bush supporter then yes, call me a hypocrite, but why call me a hypocrite when I just have better standards from my politicians?

This is exactly why so many of us Democrats aren't going to go out and vote in November.

She's still only 6 points ahead of Trump if you take an average of all major polls.

On a side note, I think it's bizarre that Fox has Hillary 10 points ahead of Trump and the LA times only has her ahead by 2 points.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ULIZOS, on 24 Aug 2016 - 7:46 PM, said:

She's still only 6 points ahead of Trump if you take an average of all major polls.

On a side note, I think it's bizarre that Fox has Hillary 10 points ahead of Trump and the LA times only has her ahead by 2 points.

There is a whole article about how the LA Times conducts their polls and how flawed the methodology is. I said you will always find some that seem to always be off and them and Rassumussen seem to be the two that instantly come to mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/24/politics/cher-hillary-clinton-fundraiser-donald-trump/

Cher defiant after harsh takedown of Trump

By Naomi Lim, CNN

Updated 5:31 PM ET, Wed August 24, 2016

Story highlights

*Cher used her contralto tones to voice her support for Clinton at a fundraiser in Massachusetts

*But she also likened Donald Trump to Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin

Washington (CNN) - Singer and Hillary Clinton supporter Cher defended herself Wednesday after she was sharply criticized for using charged language -- including references to Joseph Stalin and Adolf Hitler -- to slam Donald Trump at a recent Clinton event.

The Goddess of Pop -- who has repeatedly insulted Trump on social media -- likened the real estate mogul Sunday to the two tyrants before comparing him to Patty McCormack in the 1956 American horror film, "The Bad Seed," at a fundraising event in Provincetown, Massachusetts.

Cher's comments -- part of an unscripted speech introducing Clinton to the assembled crowd, which warmly received the remarks -- were posted on Facebook before being reported by The New York Times. The pop icon was widely criticized for the comments, but she remained defiant on Twitter Wednesday.

"Had I Known I'd Get Such Vicious Hate 4 Supporting Hillary, I Would Have Done It Anyway," Cher tweeted Wednesday. "We Seem 2 b a Country DIVIDED. Its Like a Civil War."

Introducing Clinton at the fundraiser Sunday, Cher called Trump a "consummate liar" and an "insane and sociopathic narcissist."

She added: "I was thinking all the despots, you know, Stalin, Hitler, but then I thought, even though they said the same things -- 'we're going to make Germany great again' -- and it was at a time when the Deutsche Mark I think was 25 cents. And also, like, look at Brexit. These people just screw(ed) themselves so badly because they were angry and they didn't think it could get worse."

"So anyway, I just wish he'd fall off the face of the earth," said Cher, 70.

A message left with Clinton's campaign seeking a response was not immediately returned Wednesday afternoon.

Cher regularly weighs into the political arena via social media, and she has been particularly critical of Trump for his party's stance on LGBT issues.

She said he isn't genuine when he pledges to "make America great again," Cher said, accusing Trump of wanting to "make America straight and white."

Cher also used her 16-minute remarks Sunday to talk about her friendship with Clinton and to praise her work with women and children, acknowledging that Clinton struggles to connect with voters at big campaign rallies and events.

"You know, she is shy and she's not the greatest speaker in the world," Cher said to laughs from those at the fundraiser. "But this is what I believe and this is what I know. I know that she will work every moment of every day."

She added: "I just want you to know that I believe in her so much, I believe in Hillary so much. I know that if (Trump) got into office, our world would be the worst place. We could never, I don't think we could imagine how bad it could get."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Introducing Clinton at the fundraiser Sunday, Cher called Trump a "consummate liar" and an "insane and sociopathic narcissist."

No lies seen.

Republicans are going to act so butt hurt over this but at this point I have washed my hands of their fake outrage for the simple fact that they cant even ACT like they have the moral high ground anymore. There is no need to list all the disgusting and degrading things Trump has done and said about others, and about Hillary while most republicans remained silent as this cesspool of shit took over their party. They cant say a word about crossing the line at this point anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Being ahead by 6 in an extremely polarized nation is landslide type proportions akin to Obama's 2008 numbers

It's a big lead no matter how you slice it. Obama won by 4 in 2008 and that's considered a solid win. He won by 7 in 2008- that was a massive win.

Remember we are supposed to consider Trump and Clinton equally as dreadful according to the polls. So in theory the numbers should be closer. But no matter how off putting Clinton is, plenty of ppl can see that Trump is a bloated orange joke

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Being ahead by 6 in an extremely polarized nation is landslide type proportions akin to Obama's 2008 numbers

It's a big lead no matter how you slice it. Obama won by 4 in 2008 and that's considered a solid win. He won by 7 in 2008- that was a massive win.

Remember we are supposed to consider Trump and Clinton equally as dreadful according to the polls. So in theory the numbers should be closer. But no matter how off putting Clinton is, plenty of ppl can see that Trump is a bloated orange joke

He managed to get ahead of her in the polls exactly one month ago. Anything can happen.

But anyway, I still don't understand polls. I know I've asked this before, but they just don't seem to make sense to me. They make it seem like a sizeable chunk of the voting population keeps changing their mind all the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hillary has been ahead of Trump like 95% of the time. :lmao:

He probably has an entire team of people who are just looking for dirt on her. That's like their only strategy. Try to find something that'll make America hate her enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also keep in mind that the final tally before the 2012 election when it came to Real Clear Politics averaging out all polls had Obama ahead by 0.7%.....And that ended up translating into another electoral college landslide win for Obama and who did end up winning 3.9% more of the actual vote.

So with Clinton being this ahead when it comes to the averages of all polls right now, we could be seeing a HUGE blowout.

That's if this holds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah I figured there was no Alex lovers here. Tried to find a different site but too much trouble on my slow computer I had to use to post the link.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there a President in our history who didn't do shady shit either directly or indirectly?? I seriously doubt it. ALL of it is dirty, slimy and grimy work when you break it down. ALL of them have to do shady shit. People need a reality check.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's never been a time in history when humans in power have behaved like utopian demigods. Get real. Compared to what we have done in our bloody sick history as evolved beings, the Clintons and the Rahm Emanuels and the Barack Obamas of the world are practically saints.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Bernie Butthurts are still out in 'full force'. :lmao:

What a modern hipster tragedy. Please somebody distract them with a pair of New balance or ethnic coffee shops or something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...