US Election: 2016

[mariomike]

The person being interviewed was a pollster who was asked if there really was a so called silent Trump majority that is throwing the polls off, and would show up on November 8th.

Looks like Mr. Trump really has a sort of Silent Majority,
https://www.google.ca/search?q=trump+silent+majority&rls=com.microsoft:en-CA:IE-Address&rlz=1I7GGHP_en-GBCA592&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjnmerlg9vPAhUs6YMKHRepBXgQ_AUICSgC&biw=1536&bih=770#

Good grief,
Donald Trump braced for ‘at least two more megabombs’ as Clinton ally offers ‘$5m fee’ for rumoured ‘n-word’
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/1952306/more-damaging-footage-looming-as-clinton-ally-offers-5million-fee-for-rumoured-donald-trump-n-word-apprentice-tape/

 

[cupper]

Looks like Mr. Trump really has a sort of Silent Majority,
https://www.google.ca/search?q=trump+silent+majority&rls=com.microsoft:en-CA:IE-Address&rlz=1I7GGHP_en-GBCA592&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjnmerlg9vPAhUs6YMKHRepBXgQ_AUICSgC&biw=1536&bih=770#

That's the problem with silent majorities... they don't seem to understand the meaning of the word silent.  ;D

si·lent
ˈsīlənt/
adjective
not making or accompanied by any sound.
"the woods were still and silent"
synonyms: completely quiet, still, hushed, inaudible, noiseless, soundless

"the night was silent"
(of a person) not speaking.
"she fell silent for a moment"
synonyms: speechless, quiet, unspeaking, dumb, mute, taciturn, uncommunicative, tight-lipped; informal mum
"the right to remain silent"

not expressed aloud.
"a silent prayer"
synonyms: unspoken, wordless, unsaid, unexpressed, unvoiced, tacit, implicit, understood
"silent thanks"

 

[Jarnhamar]

Right. 

So the context is that this was in response to a question if the US would respond to an Iranian attack against Israel.

She did say that.....in 2008

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-politics-iran-idUSN2224332720080422

Of course. And now Iran backed rebels are attacking US warships. Seems like Iran is just begging to be attacked. 

I don't think the WW3 hand-wringers are that out to lunch anymore.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Right. 

So the context is that this was in response to a question if the US would respond to an Iranian attack against Israel.

She did say that.....in 2008

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-politics-iran-idUSN2224332720080422

Grab them by the pussy. He did say that..............in 2005.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Good for the goose and all that. https://youtu.be/-NTq1tlBwqI

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Hypocrisy, thy name is Hillary. https://www.facebook.com/shad0wsquad/videos/928530567290772/

 

[cupper]

Good for the goose and all that. https://youtu.be/-NTq1tlBwqI

Because we all know that James O'Keefe is a shining star of journalistic integrity.  :facepalm:

 

[a_majoor]

Because we all know Legacy Media Journ-O-Lists don't collude with the DNC or their candidates. There are plenty of emails which tell us so......

Seen on Facebook is perhaps the most convincing explanation of the last two decades:

Wretchard T. Cat
14 hrs ·

The Saudis and Russians made a big discovery after the fall of the Soviet Union: that you couldn't beat the United States the country, but you could corrupt American politicians for what amounted, in their world, to chump change. You could spent a billion dollars on some useless piece of Soviet military junk, or you could spend on a junket. The junket was more effective.

Once they had blazed the trail, the Chinese followed. This system of international "cooperation" was called the "Rule Based International Order". The Saudis and Russians killed the nuclear power future to prop up oil prices. This was called "Environmentalism". Then the Wahabi lobby decided to invade the West. This was called "Multiculturalism".

It rattled along swimmingly until the wheels fell off the wagon and the curtain went up with everyone's britches down. This was called "2016".

146 Likes10 Comments130 Shares

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Because we all know that James O'Keefe is a shining star of journalistic integrity.  :facepalm:

Now you're trying to deflect. Refute what happened in the video, don't shoot the messenger. The video point is the democrats and their voter fraud, not an attack on the author. The double standard with Clinton supporters and campaign workers talking about grabbing ass and then vilifying Trump for the same thing. :


"I'm more concerned with Clinton's criminal acts and bullying her husband's rape victims than I am about what Trump says." 

 

[cavalryman]

Because we all know that James O'Keefe is a shining star of journalistic integrity.  :facepalm:

Which, at worst, does not make him any more evil than the DNC operatives with bylines pretending to be journalists for such fine Democrat propaganda mouthpieces media outlets as CNN, MSNBC, the NYT, the WaPo, etc.  Glass houses, and all that  ;D

 

[The Bread Guy]

 

[cupper]

Now you're trying to deflect. Refute what happened in the video, don't shoot the messenger. The video point is the democrats and their voter fraud, not an attack on the author. The double standard with Clinton supporters and campaign workers talking about grabbing ass and then vilifying Trump for the same thing. :


"I'm more concerned with Clinton's criminal acts and bullying her husband's rape victims than I am about what Trump says."

My point is that there is enough true BS circulating in this election that we don't need to add in items of questionable verasity.

O'Keefe has a known history of:

1) leading the interviews in directions where he can later selectively edit the video to completely change the narritive.

2) commit illegal acts to gain information or influence a subject into a compromising position

3) destroying innocent peoples lives by taking the context of a hidden camera or audio interview and completely changing the narritive into something that fits his agenda, that doesn't reflectwhat actually took place in the interview.

In another example of similar attempts to smear, some of the Wikileaks material material has been shown to be fake. A Podesta e-mail that supposedly proves shenannigans were going on in the campaign were actually quotes from an article by a Newsweek reporter, and inserted into a fake e-mail as Podesta's own words.

So if I am sceptical about certain sources of information or claims of wrong doing, this is why.

 

[dimsum]

Canada Just Wants To #TellAmericaItsGreat

While we've been slogging through what feels like the most contentious presidential election in decades, Canada seems to have been dancing on air, still caught up in the glow of a relatively new prime minister who has been compared to a Disney prince.

We on the other hand, are living through a point in the campaign where cable news might have to be censored for small children.

Enter Canada, with a small, yet poignant show of support during our year of discontent. A Toronto-based creative agency called The Garden has created the "Tell America It's Great" campaign, complete with a hashtag and a video.

http://www.npr.org/2016/10/14/497986850/canada-just-wants-to-tellamericaitsgreat?live=1&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=npr&utm_term=nprnews&utm_content=2040

Video: 

http://www.npr.org/2016/10/14/497986850/canada-just-wants-to-tellamericaitsgreat?live=1&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=npr&utm_term=nprnews&utm_content=2040

 

[George Wallace]

If only....

 

[The Bread Guy]

If only....

:nod:

 

[mariomike]

I personally dont think Trump will win, BUT < snip >

Sorry to hear that.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

My point is that there is enough true BS circulating in this election that we don't need to add in items of questionable verasity.

O'Keefe has a known history of:

1) leading the interviews in directions where he can later selectively edit the video to completely change the narritive.

2) commit illegal acts to gain information or influence a subject into a compromising position

3) destroying innocent peoples lives by taking the context of a hidden camera or audio interview and completely changing the narritive into something that fits his agenda, that doesn't reflectwhat actually took place in the interview.

In another example of similar attempts to smear, some of the Wikileaks material material has been shown to be fake. A Podesta e-mail that supposedly proves shenannigans were going on in the campaign were actually quotes from an article by a Newsweek reporter, and inserted into a fake e-mail as Podesta's own words.

So if I am sceptical about certain sources of information or claims of wrong doing, this is why.

On tape, right in front of you. Democrats breaking voting laws and you still have that overwhelming need to defend them. :facepalm:

Of course Slick Hillie's campaign workers and sources are above reproach, aren't they? Only Republicans play dirty and all of that jazz. :

 

[cupper]

What flavor of Koolaid are they serving over in Trumpland?

Hillary is serving up grape.  ;D

 

[ModlrMike]

Hillary is serving up grape.  ;D

Is it sour?

 

[The Bread Guy]

Is it sour?