a Trump vs Clinton United States Presidential Election in 2016
- Thread starter Charlie Don't Surf
- Start date
And he's got a guy claiming that the voting machines will switch votes from Trump to Clinton. So if he loses (and DEAR FUCKING GOD DO I WISH THAT WAS 'WHEN' INSTEAD OF 'IF') he's already come up with a reason why it's not his fault.
Which doesn't make sense because the voting machines are made by companies run by big-time GOP donors.
The GOP never wanted him to win. They're all secret Clinton backers.
And of course that all misses the point that, even if, as conspiracy theorists have suggested, that Trump is a sham candidate, there are still 2 very real problems:
1) that Trump still has a significant base of popular support, no matter how awful he gets, and
2) that the GOP couldn't product an actual candidate that could beat a sham candidate.
1) that Trump still has a significant base of popular support, no matter how awful he gets, and
2) that the GOP couldn't product an actual candidate that could beat a sham candidate.
Like GB must be getting tired of saying, Trump is a hand grenade aimed at D.C.
Why does it reflect badly on the GOP that they couldn't produce someone as calculatingly evil as Clinton?
Blots and Den ninja'ed you. You're losing your touch old chap.
GasBandit
Staff member
Football season keeps me busy and slows my response time >_<
stienman explained it more eloquently than I could have.
it's nice knowing that someone understands me.
Well, he'll probably use the KGB...The stupid just keeps on coming. Trump says he doesn't trust the intelligence services and won't use them if elected.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Now he's outsourcing yet another industry.
FSB
After the cold war the CIA and other intelligence services declined significantly. It was only the terrorist attack that led congress to realize that maybe perhaps it's possible that we need those services, and we can't outsource as much of them as we'd been doing through the 90's.
The patriot act doubles down on this, but against their own citizens.
It's really quite ridiculous to follow the path we've taken in regards to intelligence services since the late 70's.
That would have been pretty funny, I admit.
Oh yeah, I'm not trying to imply that Texas wants secession at the moment (that's why I linked to the PDF itself instead of all the degenerate clickbait filth).
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/17/u...e-casinos.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur&_r=0
"By the time Chris Christie became governor of New Jersey, the state’s auditors and lawyers had been battling for several years to collect long-overdue taxes owed by the casinos founded by his friend Donald J. Trump.
The total, with interest, had grown to almost $30 million. The state had doggedly pursued the matter through two of the casinos’ bankruptcy cases and even accused the company led by Mr. Trump of filing false reports with state casino regulators about the amount of taxes it had paid.
But the year after Governor Christie, a Republican, took office, the tone of the litigation shifted. The state entertained settlement offers. And in December 2011, after six years in court, the state agreed to accept just $5 million, roughly 17 cents on the dollar of what auditors said the casinos owed."
At one point the Trump Taj Mahal casino had reported it had paid $2.2 million dollars in alternative minimum assessment tax in 2003, which was not true; it had only paid $500 in income tax.
"By the time Chris Christie became governor of New Jersey, the state’s auditors and lawyers had been battling for several years to collect long-overdue taxes owed by the casinos founded by his friend Donald J. Trump.
The total, with interest, had grown to almost $30 million. The state had doggedly pursued the matter through two of the casinos’ bankruptcy cases and even accused the company led by Mr. Trump of filing false reports with state casino regulators about the amount of taxes it had paid.
But the year after Governor Christie, a Republican, took office, the tone of the litigation shifted. The state entertained settlement offers. And in December 2011, after six years in court, the state agreed to accept just $5 million, roughly 17 cents on the dollar of what auditors said the casinos owed."
At one point the Trump Taj Mahal casino had reported it had paid $2.2 million dollars in alternative minimum assessment tax in 2003, which was not true; it had only paid $500 in income tax.
I bet there's quite a few Clinton voter who would support secession if she wins, too
You'd get better results asking the rest of the country if they wanted to kick Texas out.
I imagine social welfare programs in the US do not depend on ethnic background, so I don't see where the Dems being racist part comes from.
According to my understanding, some conservatives hold the position that work is the best form of poverty reduction, in addition to having psychological benefits for the individual concerned as well. They often claim that generous wellfare benefits are a disincentive to work, thereby being a disservice to the individual in the long run, trapping them in a spiral of inactivity and dependence.
One might agree or disagree with that position (if it even is the position your brother holds), but on the whole it does not seem to me to be an unreasonable point of view to hold.
There is a difference between saying Social Welfare is a trap, and let the fuckers starve.
Agreed. However, though one might discuss the possible effects of the policies he proposes, I'm not sure Trump (or any other conservative outside possibly some ultra-fringe elements) has put mass starvation forward as a viable strategy to alleviate poverty in the United States.
But based on some of the news coverage I'm hearing of him in this thread and elsewhere, I'm willing to be proven wrong.[DOUBLEPOST=1471529471,1471528998][/DOUBLEPOST]@Dave
So according to your Brother, the social welfare programs were put in place today to specifically keep the blacks/hispanics in servitude to the Democrats since the Republicans abolished slavery?
Okay, that there does seem a bit far-fetched.
B
BErt
Wtf does this even mean
It also ignores the fact that more than 75% of people who use SNAP and TANF benefits (two of the main components of what people call 'welfare') are on it for less than 5 years. But the Reagan-era myth of the Welfare Queen is hard one to dispel because it encourages prejudice against the poor.
What are the actual numbers, and has this been historically true for decades, or is it more recent due to the economic downturn?[DOUBLEPOST=1471537001,1471536402][/DOUBLEPOST]
There's a big difference between generational poverty and situational poverty. Why 5 years? Is that just a convenient break point? Isn't being unemployed for 5 years a terrific tragedy? What is the percentage for, say, 6 months, or one year?
Given that there are about 100 million americans receiving some form of assistance (though not necessarily just SNAP and TANF) does this indicate that we have some 25 million americans who've been receiving welfare for over 5 years?
That nearly 10% of the US is receiving welfare benefits for over 5 years?