The Bigly 2016 US Presidential Election Thread, Part XV

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
A lot of people believe that HRC was at the forefront of the Clintons' endeavors to intimidate, discredit, and/or slander his accusers. I can't say whether that's true, but that story gets told as though it were proven quite frequently.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
Her voters really need to take a look in the mirror and realize they don't understand the pulse of the American people.

her voters, as in (almost certainly) the majority of the american people, don't "understand the pulse of the american people" (whatever the fuck that's supposed to mean)?
 
Oregoropa and deep and everyone else who thinks that 12-year-olds talk about grabbing pussies and forcibly kissing women in schoolyards is normal and that walking into women's change rooms to ogle minor children is ok, and that groping multiple women over the years is ok, and talking about dating your sexy daughter is ok, and that checking out 10-year-old children and for potential date-ability down the road is ok, I can only hope that you do not have daughters.
 
her voters, as in (almost certainly) the majority of the american people, don't "understand the pulse of the american people" (whatever the fuck that's supposed to mean)?

You mean a plurality of the 52% or so voting age individuals that will actually bother to vote. And that's if she wins.

But no, it's not like her policies or anything she's done has really resonated with people and excited them to vote for her. They mostly want to stop Trump.
 
Last edited:
Oregoropa and deep and everyone else who thinks that 12-year-olds talk about grabbing pussies and forcibly kissing women in schoolyards is normal and that walking into women's change rooms to ogle minor children is ok, and that groping multiple women over the years is ok, and talking about dating your sexy daughter is ok, and that checking out 10-year-old children and for potential date-ability down the road is ok, I can only hope that you do not have daughters.

Or come into contact with anyone else's daughters. That's not a belief system or set of values that any young woman should be exposed to.
 
You mean a plurality of the 52% or so voting age individuals that will actually bother to vote. And that's if she wins.

But no, it's not like her policies or anything she's done has really resonated with people and excited them to vote for her. They mostly want to stop Trump.


BACK IT UP. STOP TALKING OUT OF YOUR ASS. ARE YOU CLAIMING THAT CHILDRENS' OPINIONS ARE RELEVANT???

You can't back anything you ever say up. You don't understand statistics, either.
 
A lot of people believe that HRC was at the forefront of the Clintons' endeavors to intimidate, discredit, and/or slander his accusers. I can't say whether that's true, but that story gets told as though it were proven quite frequently.

And until there actually is sufficient enough proof to show that happened, people need to quit spreading it around like it's fact. If there's legit evidence claiming she went on a big campaign to do that, the people claiming such a thing need to show it. If not, then they need to drop it and quit blaming her for Bill's actions.

I also think people also need to take into account that a woman who's: a) learned of her husband's infidelity and is having to watch the whole mess play out in the public eye; b) being scrutinized about her marriage and having to listen to all sorts of gossip and rumors; and c) listen to armchair "marriage experts" talk about what she "should/should not do" as a wife and mother in response to finding out about her husband's behavior may lash out in anger as a result, and a wife wanting to believe her husband is innocent of whatever he's being accused of should not exactly be a shocking response.

If she did indeed contribute to a concentrated effort to take down Bill's accusers, I completely agree that that would be wrong. But if the most she's done is make a few snippy comments about some of Bill's accusers, which seems to be about all I have managed to find thus far in regards to this supposed rumor, it's not a good way to respond to the situation, no, but it doesn't exactly rise to the level of a full on campaign to discredit and intimidate the other women. And it still doesn't make her responsible for Bill's shit. The person who is actually being accused of the crime is the one who needs to be held responsible.

(I'd also be interested to see how people would've reacted had she actually divorced Bill. Sure, there'd be plenty of people who would support her, but considering the Republicans' constant harping on and on about "traditional family values", don't even try and tell me some of them wouldn't turn around and criticize her for not "standing by her man" or some such BS. Don't tell me there wouldn't be people making stupid assumptions about a single woman running for president. She wouldn't be able to win either way in some people's eyes on that front.)
 
Last edited:
Yet you do? The racist sexist socialist understands the pulse of America? That's laughable, you don't even understand basic economics, or why one early poll didn't mean shit, or why creating monoliths of women and African Americans, etc is ignorant.

You can't figure these things out, yet you have your finger on the pulse of America? There is no emoticon in existence to express the sad hilarity of that statement.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

BMP is a socialist now? News to me.
 
BACK IT UP. STOP TALKING OUT OF YOUR ASS. ARE YOU CLAIMING THAT CHILDRENS' OPINIONS ARE RELEVANT???

You can't back anything you ever say up. You don't understand statistics, either.

:up:

mici5tv3a0vx.jpg


this sign was put there by a man from a factory downtown.
 
Last edited:
Yes, while you're voting Bill Clinton back into the White House you are technically voting for his enabler.

And if we're going to talk about what the American people wants, Trump sure tapped into class resentment and populism fairly well while Hillary took an Obama approval rating of around 56 and managed to drop into the high forties. Just like the primary before this, Clinton merely loses supporters as the cycle wears on and everyone else gains. She just does not connect with the American people, and if early numbers are to be believed, especially black voters.

Dem Strategist: Clinton Should Be In "Panic Mode" Over Enthusiasm Gap With Black Voters, "Nothing She Can Do Now" | Video | RealClearPolitics

Ohhhhhhh. A woman whose husband cheats is an enabler.

You're right. She really wants him to cheat. She was asking for it by leaving the kitchen.
 
So this is frightening.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/u-militia-girds-trouble-presidential-election-nears-102009970.html

As the most divisive presidential election in recent memory nears its conclusion, some armed militia groups are preparing for the possibility of a stolen election on Nov. 8 and civil unrest in the days following a victory by Democrat Hillary Clinton.

They say they won't fire the first shot, but they're not planning to leave their guns at home, either.

Trump's populist campaign has energized militia members like Hill, who admire the Republican mogul's promise to deport illegal immigrants, stop Muslims from entering the country and build a wall along the Mexico border. Trump has repeatedly warned that the election may be "rigged," and has said he may not respect the results if he does not win. At least one paramilitary group, the Oath Keepers, has called on members to monitor voting sites for signs of fraud.

Amid the war games, Hill weighed plans for a possible armed march on Washington if Clinton wins.

He said he doesn't want his members leading the way, but they will defend the protesters if need be. His group will not hesitate to act if a President Clinton tries to disarm gun owners, he said.

"I will be there to render assistance to my fellow countrymen, and prevent them from being disarmed, and I will fight and I will kill and I may die in the process," said Hill, who founded the militia several years ago.

Trump's candidacy has emboldened extremist groups to speak more openly about challenging the rule of law, said Ryan Lenz, a researcher at the Southern Poverty Law Center.


"Prior to this campaign season, these ideas were relegated to sort of the political fringe of the American political landscape," he said. "Now these ideas are legitimized."

Over the past week, some prominent Trump supporters have hinted at violence.

"If Trump loses, I'm grabbing my musket," former Illinois Representative Joe Walsh wrote on Twitter last week. Conservative commentator Wayne Root fantasized about Clinton's death while speaking at a Trump rally in Las Vegas on Sunday.

Thanks for proving precisely why we desperately need better gun control, you psychos :|.

Also, fuck Trump.
 
no angry mob of rednecks with ar-15s is getting anywhere near washington. they'd start shooting each other before they got to the next town from where they started.
 
Yeah, I'm not expecting they'd actually carry out that insane plan, no. It's more just the idea that they're even talking about doing such a thing, and thinking this is a totally normal, rational way to react to an election outcome or any attempt at anything resembling gun control, that disturbs me. They may not make it to Washington, but I shudder to think of what else they could try and do if the election doesn't go their way.
 
And Trump's odds are now double what the Cubs were at their low point.

And I was referring to Hillary being an enabler by continuing with the cover ups and acting like the news of his cheating was a big shock (as if the previous affairs and sexual allegations over the previous decades would not have at least made her suspicious). But way to take the high road and just declare another poster a sexist at every turn.
 
Oh please. I'm the last person to be "declaring another poster a sexist at every other turn." I'm the one usually throwing my hands up about people doing that, and it sucks that you have to be saying it because I end up losing credibility the minute you speak. You are questionably sexist and racist. In the oblivious sense.

You also don't know what an enabler is. An enabler is someone who freaking facilitates something. Not someone who doesn't come out to combat it. It's her freaking husband. And, at the time, the President of the United States. During a time where sexism and gender roles were far bigger than they are today. Look no further than Princess Diana during the very same time period and what happened when a high profile marriage fell apart.
 
She knows Bill and knows what he does and I'm sure he's been honest about these liaisons in private when she's asked as it jeopardizes both of their political careers. So by allowing it to continue, whether consensual or an assault, she is being an enabler. Coming forth with the actual truth would be the right thing to do if she cared a damn about these other women's stories and well being. But she doesn't. It's all token bits here and there to appease a wobbly coalition on the road to more power. Shameless. :down:

To act like she's unaware of his actions would be a sexist statement in itself, as if arguably the most qualified woman in America to run for President has been oblivious for decades about the tendencies and actions of a man who used to loiter around the college library in order to walk women to their dorm and bed them. She fucking knows what he's like and what he's done, but to come clean with it or sever ties with the man would arguably harm her political career which is far more important than the voices of his victims and those that he marginalized (and she as well, knowingly or unknowingly).
 
She knows Bill and knows what he does and I'm sure he's been honest about these liaisons in private when she's asked as it jeopardizes both of their political careers. So by allowing it to continue, whether consensual or an assault, she is being an enabler. Coming forth with the actual truth would be the right thing to do if she cared a damn about these other women's stories and well being. But she doesn't. It's all token bits here and there to appease a wobbly coalition on the road to more power. Shameless. :down:


And here it comes back around again, equating sexual assault to consent. It's not the same thing!! And you've not a damn clue if they've an open relationship, or if she doesn't know shit until well after it happened. Don't pretend to know more than you do. We all know you like to do that, but stop.

You point is also really shitty. They're husband and wife. You 1) assume she knows something and 2) assume it's assault, giving you a conclusion that Clinton somehow encourages sexual assault. Against her husband, of all people! You have baseless assumptions. You don't know what you think you know, and furthermore your response to what you think you know is a subjective one.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom