30
   

When will Hillary Clinton give up her candidacy ? Part 2

 
 
Lash
 
  -3  
Reply Wed 26 Oct, 2016 03:08 am
@izzythepush,
Your post mentioning me is completely unrelated to anything I said. Get a hobby, sad sack.
izzythepush
 
  2  
Reply Wed 26 Oct, 2016 04:57 am
@Lash,
You misrepresented the Guardian\'s position on Clinton. Either it was a deliberate lie, or you lack the capacity to differentiate between a news item and an opinion piece. From your previous posts it could be either.

Do you know any real teachers who could help?
Lash
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 26 Oct, 2016 05:34 am
@izzythepush,
I linked a Guardian article about Hillary\\\'s Syrian strategy. It speaks for itself.

You\\\\\\\'re trying way too hard to create a conflict. Try gardening.

Excerpted from the Guardian article:

The proposal of no-fly zones has been fiercely debated in Washington for the past five years, but has never attracted significant enthusiasm from the military because of the risk to pilots from Syrian air defenses and the presence of Russian warplanes.

Many in US national security circles consider the risk of an aerial confrontation with the Russians to be severe.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  3  
Reply Wed 26 Oct, 2016 06:28 am
@Lash,
You are playing at the periphery of reality. You seem to have stepped over the line on several occasions.
Lash
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 26 Oct, 2016 06:53 am
@parados,
That's a valiant attempt to deflect the fact that I was correct, placing you and the disgruntled Hillary-ites squarely into the incorrect column, yet again.

But, no. I'm the only one looking objectively at the facts.

Lash
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 26 Oct, 2016 06:55 am
@Lash,
You should try it. Barring your agenda to support Hillary, what is your most thoughtful strategy for Americans regarding the Syrian imbroglio?
0 Replies
 
Brand X
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Oct, 2016 07:00 am
@Lash,
At least your not in the nonchalant/dead inside camp.
Lash
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 26 Oct, 2016 07:23 am
@Brand X,
LOL. Yes, there is that.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  3  
Reply Wed 26 Oct, 2016 01:06 pm
@Lash,

You made a conclusion from wild ass assumptions and links to a couple of questionable opinion pieces. I pointed out the series of what ifs that would have to occur so now I am deflecting? I am not deflecting and you are hardly correct.

Let us know when you actually have facts. What you have introduced so far is not facts but speculation. I can tell the difference. If something has not happened any claim of what will result is speculation not facts. If the exact thing has happened before we can conclude it might be likely for the same result.
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  0  
Reply Thu 27 Oct, 2016 06:06 am
@ossobucotemp,
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Oct, 2016 06:32 am
The Yale Record Does Not Endorse Hillary Clinton


Oct 26, 2016
87542

In its 144-year history, The Yale Record has never endorsed a Democratic candidate for president. In fact, we have never endorsed any candidate for president. This is, in part, due to our strong commitment to being a tax-exempt 501(c)3 organization, which mandates that we are “absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office.”

This year’s presidential election is highly unusual, but ultimately no different: The Yale Record believes both candidates to be equally un-endorsable, due to our faithful compliance with the tax code.

In particular, we do not endorse Hillary Clinton’s exemplary leadership during her 30 years in the public eye. We do not support her impressive commitment to serving and improving this country—a commitment to which she has dedicated her entire professional career. Because of unambiguous tax law, we do not encourage you to support the most qualified presidential candidate in modern American history, nor do we encourage all citizens to shatter the glass ceiling once and for all by electing Secretary Clinton on November 8.

The Yale Record has no opinion whatsoever on Dr. Jill Stein.

—The Editorial Board of The Yale Record

Just for McG because he wouldn't be able to figure it out himself:

http://yalerecord.org/2016/10/26/the-yale-record-does-not-endorse-hillary-clinton/
McGentrix
 
  0  
Reply Thu 27 Oct, 2016 06:35 am
@bobsal u1553115,
I knew I could teach you to do the right thing. Wasn't so hard after all was it?
bobsal u1553115
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 27 Oct, 2016 06:37 am
@McGentrix,
Didn't teach me a thing, I already knew you're short yellow bus special,
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 27 Oct, 2016 06:40 am
@parados,
parados wrote:

I am sure I saw Hillary packing up her ole kit bag and grabbing her guns and butter and of course that means WW3.

No doubt about it. Hillary is also taking your health insurance away, Lash. She now has a secret mic that lets her put thoughts in your head so you think they are yours.


You made this cavalier statement, sidestepping the fact that Hillary's no fly zone has been rejected as a very dangerous idea by most military strategists.

I proved it has been.

You are incorrect.
Btw, Obamacare is set to skyrocket by at least 25%, which for most Americans--is akin to taking my health insurance away. I can't afford to go to the doctor as it is. Thanks to Obama, Americans are REQUIRED to show proof of insurance or PAY an additional tax penalty.

Hillary wrapped herself in Obama during the campaign, and she'll pay for it. This is an enraging issue. I think many Americans are going to reject and test this law and send Obama a proper **** you via Hillary on Election Day.
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Oct, 2016 06:42 am
@snood,
If that pipe dream comes to pass, I would quite happily say I was wrong and sing her praises.
snood
 
  2  
Reply Thu 27 Oct, 2016 07:03 am
@Lash,
Quote:
I would quite happily say I was wrong and sing her praises.


Now, that's a pipe dream. Imagining you letting go of your irrational hatred of Clinton, irrespective of what she does.
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  2  
Reply Thu 27 Oct, 2016 07:19 am
Whoa. Turns out Jill Stein and her husband are heavily invested in all those "1%" interests that she blames for all the evils in the world.

Stein and her husband, Richard Roher, have investments valued between $3,832,050 to $8,505,000, according to documents examined by the Daily Beast.

The couple has up to $2.2 million invested in funds such as the Vanguard 500, which puts capital into energy companies such as Exxon — which Stein has said should get the death penalty for “climate-change fraud” — Chevron, Duke Energy, Conoco Phillips and Toho Gas.

Stein has also invested up to $2.65 million in funds that hold significant stakes in big banks, such as JP Morgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, Deutsche Bank and Wells Fargo.

Stein also holds investments worth up to $2.4 million in funds that maintain stakes in the pharmaceutical companies Pfizer, Novartis, Johnson & Johnson, and Allergan, and she has invested up to $100,000 in Merck.

The physician also has up to $1.1 million invested in funds that holds stakes in the tobacco company Phillip Morris International, and up to $100,000 invested in a fund that holds significant stakes in the defense contractor Raytheon.

http://www.rawstory.com/2016/10/big-pharma-wall-street-and-big-oil-jill-stein-is-heavily-invested-in-industries-she-rails-against/
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  2  
Reply Thu 27 Oct, 2016 07:38 am
@Lash,
Lash wrote:


You made this cavalier statement, sidestepping the fact that Hillary's no fly zone hasn't been rejected as a very dangerous idea by most military strategists.
My statement was satirical in response to your flip comment
.Most military strategists? You mean like the ones at World Socialist Web Site? Or the ONE top general cited in the Daily Caller and Guardian articles? One top general does not most military strategists make.


Quote:
I proved it has been.
No, you proved you are bad at math and English.
Quote:

You are incorrect.
Btw, Obamacare is set to skyrocket by at least 25%, which for most Americans--is akin to taking my health insurance away.
Premiums are set to rise by 25% on average. 25% average is not the same as at least 25%. Assuming a standard deviation from the average would mean that about half of Americans will see a premium increase of less than 25%. Once again, you prove you are bad with math.

Quote:

I can't afford to go to the doctor as it is.
Are you stuck in a low paying job? Perhaps you should better yourself. You could always get a second job since you seem to have a lot of spare time on your hands. Or you could join a teacher's union that actually has health insurance benefits.

Quote:

Thanks to Obama, Americans are REQUIRED to show proof of insurance or PAY an additional tax penalty.
They are required to state whether they have insurance. The majority don't have to show any proof.

Quote:

Hillary wrapped herself in Obama during the campaign, and she'll pay for it. This is an enraging issue. I think many Americans are going to reject and test this law and send Obama a proper **** you via Hillary on Election Day.

That must be why every poll, including some of the latest LATimes polls, has Clinton leading. It's all those enraged people refusing to support her because of a President that only has a 53-55% approval rating. (A rating higher than Reagan's when he left office.)
revelette2
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Oct, 2016 07:39 am
Hillary's military stance has always worried me, she is very hawkish. However, considering the alternative of Trump and any ideas he would have, she is still the better alternative. Hillary is right about the buildup of Syria's military power they have gotten with the help of Russia and frankly, I can't see what good it is keeping on with the status quo with that situation. I read an article in the Salon, it referenced the stolen emails of which I don't give credence to simply because they were stolen and in others hands and by that very fact, they could have been tampered with; so we don't know if everything we read in her speeches were exactly what she really said. In a court of law, those emails would be thrown out because they have been compromised so I don't understand people using them as evidence of something. Nevertheless, the article does talk about what Lash is talking about. Hilary is a smart woman, I believe she would consider all option and listen to all the generals if (hopefully) if she becomes president.

Here is the Salon article I was speaking of for it is worth.
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Oct, 2016 07:43 am
@parados,
parados wrote:
Lash wrote:

I can't afford to go to the doctor as it is.
Are you stuck in a low paying job? Perhaps you should better yourself. You could always get a second job since you seem to have a lot of spare time on your hands. Or you could join a teacher's union that actually has health insurance benefits.

Quote:

Well, not to mention that in that case if you're getting insurance through the ACA you should be getting a subsidy for your insurance, in which case the increase won't be affecting you....

Also, what would your situation be without the ACA? Better? Worse?


This is just a bunch of fear, uncertainty, and doubt thrown at the wall to see what will stick....
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 04/19/2024 at 12:22:00