[POLL] United States Presidential Elections 2016

[McLaren]

Hillary is for corporate taxes? No? Banning guns? No? Taxing the rich? Maybe? Universal healthcare? Kinda? It's not really clear. Neither of them want to be pinned down with anything concrete. Even if they did, trust is an issue with either one. How can you say they represent you?

That's more than likely yes, considering one of the leaked emails showed she pledged gun control by executive order. She wants to go as far as to let victims sue the gun manufacturers. It's almost genius; she'll never have to actually ban guns because the makers would go out of business from law suits.

Imagine the awful trend that would start if you could get away with suing a gun manufacturer because some yoohoo shot you?

If at first you don't succeed, claim it's all a conspiracy against you:

http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2016-...rs-'sick'-liars-as-new-claims-surface/7935672

It may very well be. 30 days to election, and now this all comes out?

As for Mrs. Leeds, she's already being called out for describing Trump's advances nearly word-for-word as a rape case from 2014.

Of course as seen from our fair & unbiased media however, only the conservatives resort to plagiarizing.

 

[Danoff]

That's more than likely yes, considering one of the leaked emails showed she pledged gun control by executive order. She wants to go as far as to let victims sue the gun manufacturers. It's almost genius; she'll never have to actually ban guns because the makers would go out of business from law suits.

Imagine the awful trend that would start if you could get away with suing a gun manufacturer because some yoohoo shot you?

It may very well be. 30 days to election, and now this all comes out?

As for Mrs. Leeds, she's already being called out for describing Trump's advances nearly word-for-word as a rape case from 2014.

Of course as seen from our fair & unbiased media however, only the conservatives resort to plagiarizing.

She can't allow victims to sue gun manufacturers by executive order. That's beyond absurd.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

It may very well be. 30 days to election, and now this all comes out?

Apparently it's motivated by the release of the tapes where Trump boasts about using his celebrity to do whatever he pleases with women without fear of consequence. Now that this is in the public arena, these women feel comfortable discussing it. It's not an uncommon phenomenon - being violated is a traumatic experience; openly discussing it can be a very disturbing experience because it means reliving it and opening yourself up to criticism. How many times has a woman been blamed for her own assault because she was dressed provocatively? Men frequently use victim-blaming as a means of absolving themselves of responsibility.

I know this from experience. When I was at university, I used to work as a peer counsellor. We had a lot of problems with immature teenagers living away from home for the first time, drinking irresponsibly and doing some very stupid things. I dealt with a lot of girls who had been subject to unwanted attention and some rather crass comments from boys about what they'd like to do to them, and even that was hard enough for the girls to talk about - but they were far more willing to talk about it once it had been established that there was a pattern.

As for Mrs. Leeds, she's already being called out for describing Trump's advances nearly word-for-word as a rape case from 2014.

I must have heard the octopus simile a dozen times when I was a counsellor. There's a reason for it - it's apt. When a victim is cornered by her abuser and he starts getting physical, you can see the parallel between his hands being everywhere and a octopus' tentacles. Plus, there's the tactile imagery of slimy tentacles, which really adds weight to the feeling of discomfort.

 

[McLaren]

She can't allow victims to sue gun manufacturers by executive order. That's beyond absurd.

That's what her press secretary said in an e-mail when he learned the Today show would question her.

Circling back around on guns as a follow up to the Friday morning discussion: the Today show has indicated they definitely plan to ask [a]bout guns, and so to have the discussion be more of a news event than her previous times discussing guns, we are going to background reporters tonight on a few of the specific proposals she would support as President – universal background checks of course, but also closing the gun show loophole by executive order and imposing manufacturer liability.

Sen. Russ Feingold was asked earlier in the year by an undercover reporter at a fundraiser, if the Republicans control Congress and if Hillary is elected, is there anything she could do to basically bypass them? Feingold said, "Well, there might be executive order.” When the reporter responds that he knew Obama did it, Feingold finished, "He did some executive orders with the aspects of waiting periods. But what we all need is to win the Senate, have her there, and then put pressure on the House. And we might win the House.”

Later on, when the reporter talked to Amy Rao, and asked why Feingold won't ban guns (another woman said it's because he is from Wisconsin and wants their vote).

O’Keefe also spoke with Amy Rao, Clinton’s friend and host of the fundraiser. On hidden camera video, Rao says, “Hillary wants to shut it down. She wants to shut it down,” referring to guns.

Rao continued: “If we can get guns away from everyone in this country, she’ll close the loopholes, get rid of assault weapons. She’ll get rid of being able to buy, you know, unlimited bullets. She’s going to make all that stop.”

 

[killerjimbag]

Has Trump been charged with an offense? Hey what he said is truly terrible. But,innocent until proven guilty! I'm a Canadian watching this. The US has 361,000,000 people give or take. It's been narrowed down to these 2 idiots? God help the free world.

 

[Danoff]

That's what her press secretary said in an e-mail when he learned the Today show would question her.


Sen. Russ Feingold was asked earlier in the year by an undercover reporter at a fundraiser, if the Republicans control Congress and if Hillary is elected, is there anything she could do to basically bypass them? Feingold said, "Well, there might be executive order.” When the reporter responds that he knew Obama did it, Feingold finished, "He did some executive orders with the aspects of waiting periods. But what we all need is to win the Senate, have her there, and then put pressure on the House. And we might win the House.”

Later on, when the reporter talked to Amy Rao, and asked why Feingold won't ban guns (another woman said it's because he is from Wisconsin and wants their vote).

Where's the part where she enables people to sue manufacturers by executive order. Because the phrase "manufacturer liability" could be just about anything, including liability for lack of background checks.

 

[Chrunch Houston]

Has Trump been charged with an offense? Hey what he said is truly terrible. But,innocent until proven guilty!

Not only has he never been charged, but he has never even been sued. It seems to me that a lech with pockets as deep as his would surely have been sued by someone. This is America after all.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Has Trump been charged with an offense? Hey what he said is truly terrible. But,innocent until proven guilty!

The problem is that he's a hypocrite. He's quite happy to sledge the Clinton campaign, parading alleged victims around in front of the world's media and expecting everyone to accept their accusations as being true based on nothing more than good faith - but the moment someone steps forward and makes similarly-themed accusations against him, it's suddenly a conspiracy among the media and the political elite to discredit him, with all involved forced to resort to slanderous and libellous statements because of their fear of the widespread political and social change that he will bring. He claims that he shouldn't be held accountable for the tapes because they're over a decade old, but he's using accusations that are even older to attack the Clintons. He's more than willing to dish it out, but can't take it when it's aimed at him. He promised evidence that would unequivocally exonerate him, but the best that he can do is speculate that the women accusing him might just want their fifteen minutes of fame, and direct people to a journalist's Facebook page with the vague claim that it will vindicate him and prove her a liar.

The irony is that the existence of the tapes from 2005 gives us more reason to believe the accusations against him.

 

[Sanji Himura]

Well yes, there is, for instance, a big difference between & household income of $100,000 & a household income of $200,000. I purposely put "middle class" in quotes for that reason. Your chart doesn't have nearly enough detail to be particularly revealing about what has been going on, but as I pointed it out, your chart actually shows a stagnation of income for the range of "middle class" after 2000.

Not sure what you mean. The chart depicts incomes when the government actively abandoned control of the private market price of gold (in other words, they allowed market forces to dictate the price of gold since March of 1968, well within the scope of the chart.) Prior to that, gold was at a firm price of $35 an ounce.

In any case, you seem to be wildly underestimating the sophistication of the research that exists on the subject. The definition of middle class is, of course, understood by all economists & economic statisticians to be an important consideration.

Am I oversimplifying things? Maybe. Did I misspeak? Probably not. If we have arranged all household incomes like we do see in that chart [sub $35k, $35k-$100k and over $100k] and adjust it for inflation (2014 dollars), then the trend basically holds regardless of how far back we go. Just keep in mind of 1930, that was the year that the government de-tenderized gold as currency and FDR made a play to seize it from private hands.

 

[McLaren]

Where's the part where she enables people to sue manufacturers by executive order. Because the phrase "manufacturer liability" could be just about anything, including liability for lack of background checks.

Right here by voting No on prohibiting or banning lawsuits against the manufacturers.

http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Hillary_Clinton_Gun_Control.htm

Voted NO on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers.

A bill to prohibit civil liability actions from being brought or continued against manufacturers, distributors, dealers, or importers of firearms or ammunition for damages, injunctive or other relief resulting from the misuse of their products by others. Voting YES would:

• Exempt lawsuits brought against individuals who knowingly transfer a firearm that will be used to commit a violent or drug-trafficking crime
• Exempt lawsuits against actions that result in death, physical injury or property damage due solely to a product defect
• Call for the dismissal of all qualified civil liability actions pending on the date of enactment by the court in which the action was brought
• Prohibit the manufacture, import, sale or delivery of armor piercing ammunition, and sets a minimum prison term of 15 years for violations
• Require all licensed importers, manufacturers and dealers who engage in the transfer of handguns to provide secure gun storage or safety devices

Reference: Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act; Bill S 397 ; vote number 2005-219 on Jul 29, 2005

Voted NO on banning lawsuits against gun manufacturers for gun violence.

Vote to pass a bill that would block certain civil lawsuits against manufacturers, distributors, dealers and importers of firearms and ammunition, mainly those lawsuits aimed at making them liable for gun violence. In this bill, trade groups would also be protected The bill would call for the dismissal of pending lawsuits against the gun industry. The exception would be lawsuits regarding a defect in a weapon or ammunition. It also would provide a 10-year reauthorization of the assault weapons ban which is set to expire in September 2004. The bill would increase the penalties for gun-related violent or drug trafficking crimes which have not resulted in death, to a minimum of 15 years imprisonment. The bill calls for criminal background checks on all firearm transactions at gun shows where at least 75 guns are sold. Exemptions would be made available for dealers selling guns from their homes as well as members-only gun swaps and meets carried out by nonprofit hunting clubs.

Reference: Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act; Bill S.1805/H.R.1036 ; vote number 2004-30 on Mar 2, 2004

And right here in 2015.

Sensible restraints on manufacturer liability & online sales
I will push hard to get more sensible restraints. I want to work with Congress, but I will also look at ways as president. We must expand background checks for gun shows and online sales, and close the current loophole that negates the need for a background check after a 3-day waiting period. I will also repeal legislation that shields gun manufacturers, distributors and dealers from liability suits, even in cases of mass shootings.

Source: Fox News 2015 coverage of 2016 presidential hopefuls , Oct 5, 2015

Or maybe this tweet from April?

If toy companies are held accountable for endangering our kids, gun makers should be too. Let's end their immunity.

The conversation from Feingold & Rao hints that she could use Executive Order to accomplish this.

You're smarter than that; you know full well "manufacturer liability" means holding them accountable at any length. It was even an area where she & Bernie clashed, claiming Bernie was not tough enough for gun control.

 

[Dotini]

Latest Wikileaks seem to imply John Pedesta had foreknowledge of Supreme Court Justice Scalia death by assassination.
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/201...desta-documents-suggest-scalia-assassination/

 

[killerjimbag]

The problem is that he's a hypocrite. He's quite happy to sledge the Clinton campaign, parading alleged victims around in front of the world's media and expecting everyone to accept their accusations as being true based on nothing more than good faith - but the moment someone steps forward and makes similarly-themed accusations against him, it's suddenly a conspiracy among the media and the political elite to discredit him, with all involved forced to resort to slanderous and libellous statements because of their fear of the widespread political and social change that he will bring. He claims that he shouldn't be held accountable for the tapes because they're over a decade old, but he's using accusations that are even older to attack the Clintons. He's more than willing to dish it out, but can't take it when it's aimed at him. He promised evidence that would unequivocally exonerate him, but the best that he can do is speculate that the women accusing him might just want their fifteen minutes of fame, and direct people to a journalist's Facebook page with the vague claim that it will vindicate him and prove her a liar.

The irony is that the existence of the tapes from 2005 gives us more reason to believe the accusations against him.

Has he been charged with a crime? Has Hillary committed offenses and been charged? Until someone is charged with an offense,its hearsay.Pony up with charges,and let the legal system do its job. Their both useless pieces of 🤬 in my books.

 

[Sanji Himura]

Has he been charged with a crime? Has Hillary committed offenses and been charged? Until someone is charged with an offense,its hearsay.Pony up with charges,and let the legal system do its job. Their both useless pieces of 🤬 in my books.

There is one critical difference between Trump and Clinton (both Bill and Hillary)...

The Clintons are STILL being investigated for a crime. Trump has never been investigated for a crime, at worst, he has bad taste in women when he wants to talk about them.

Oh, by the way, there is new evidence out there that Trump accuser Jessica Leeds has stolen her story word for word from a 1968 Velvet Underground song. I have included the relevant section below:

My God he was like an octopus, hands all over the place, lifted the arm rest up, after a while i got tired of fighting him off, After all I didn't do anything, you know what i mean

Furthermore, a second Trump accuser (this time Summer Zervos, the woman who was often seen with Clinton supporter Gloria Allred) tried to get a job with Trump AFTER she accused him of sexually assaulting her two years after his alleged 2007 assault. Furthermore, as recently as last year, Ms. Zervos attempted to reach out to him for business advice.

http://dcwhispers.com/woman-accusin...trump-alleged-harassment/#Sy3Qmz5QE3x7dKud.99

 

[killerjimbag]

There is one critical difference between Trump and Clinton (both Bill and Hillary)...

The Clintons are STILL being investigated for a crime. Trump has never been investigated for a crime, at worst, he has bad taste in women when he wants to talk about them.

Oh, by the way, there is new evidence out there that Trump accuser Jessica Leeds has stolen her story word for word from a 1968 Velvet Underground song. I have included the relevant section below:





Furthermore, a second Trump accuser (this time Summer Zervos, the woman who was often seen with Clinton supporter Gloria Allred) tried to get a job with Trump AFTER she accused him of sexually assaulting her two years after his alleged 2007 assault. Furthermore, as recently as last year, Ms. Zervos attempted to reach out to him for business advice.

http://dcwhispers.com/woman-accusin...trump-alleged-harassment/#Sy3Qmz5QE3x7dKud.99

What difference? The guys a dbag. Do you have a Mother,sister,or daughter? Would you like someone to talk about them like that. The Clintons are a joke. Investigations are just that. Gloria Aldred is her lawyer. You think she's not going to try and press charges? Watch the 🤬 show unfold. It's a sad state of affairs that these are the 2 candidates,yeah I know there are 2 others,snow balls chance in hell of that happening,that 1 of these 2 will be president.

 

[Famine]

It's a sad state of affairs that these are the 2 candidates,yeah I know there are 2 others,snow balls chance in hell of that happening,that 1 of these 2 will be president.

Whenever I read nonsense like this, all I actually see is:

Don't blame me. I voted for Kodos.

 

[Dotini]

The Wall Street Journal now admits the press has been burying all of Hillary's sins.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-press-buries-hillary-clintons-sins-1476401308

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-...ess-consistently-buries-hillary-clintons-sins

"The juiciest of the Podesta leaks" according to USAToday:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...four-juiciest-leaked-podesta-emails/92014368/

 

[Neddo]

Whenever I read nonsense like this, all I actually see is:

*kudos lol

 

[killerjimbag]

Whenever I read nonsense like this, all I actually see is:

I'm Canadian. We have our own village idiot. Trudeau.

 

[Sanji Himura]

What difference? The guys a dbag. Do you have a Mother,sister,or daughter? Would you like someone to talk about them like that. The Clintons are a joke. Investigations are just that. Gloria Aldred is her lawyer. You think she's not going to try and press charges? Watch the 🤬 show unfold. It's a sad state of affairs that these are the 2 candidates,yeah I know there are 2 others,snow balls chance in hell of that happening,that 1 of these 2 will be president.

You are putting words into my mouth. I don't deny that Trump is a dbag. I just said that he didn't commit any crime while he was making those comments.

 

[TRGTspecialist]

Look at any given Rally, Trump tends to have 2 to 5 times more people showing up.

Maybe, but those rallies number in the hundreds/thousands, in an election where both Trump and Clinton will be getting tens of millions of votes. I doubt they're very representative of their voter base.

Oh, by the way, there is new evidence out there that Trump accuser Jessica Leeds has stolen her story word for word from a 1968 Velvet Underground song. I have included the relevant section below:

You can't be serious. I won't do the hard maths but I imagine the probabilty of a phrase from her statement closely matching by chance any phrase, in any culturally known piece of text, is incredibly high. Her claim could be total rubbish, but a blooming Velvet Underground song isn't remotely proof of that, I'm amazed you think it could be.

 

[ryzno]

Maybe, but those rallies number in the hundreds/thousands, in an election where both Trump and Clinton will be getting tens of millions of votes. I doubt they're very representative of their voter base.



You can't be serious. I won't do the hard maths but I imagine the probabilty of a phrase from her statement closely matching by chance any phrase, in any culturally known piece of text, is incredibly high. Her claim could be total rubbish, but a blooming Velvet Underground song isn't remotely proof of that, I'm amazed you think it could be.

From what I read on an Anonymous link, she stole lines from a few other things too. Just sayin.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

*kudos

I too love incorrect corrections. So thanks for that.

You can't be serious. I won't do the hard maths but I imagine the probabilty of a phrase from her statement closely matching by chance any phrase, in any culturally known piece of text, is incredibly high. Her claim could be total rubbish, but a blooming Velvet Underground song isn't remotely proof of that, I'm amazed you think it could be.

Indeed. How long before we hear "accuser X has stolen their story from accuser Y, who was also sexually assaulted by someone... it must be a lie!"?

 

[Biggles]

What really (among many, many other things) disqualifies Trump from the Presidency is not so much the possibility of a continuing history of sexual misdeeds, it's his inability to address it with any maturity or intelligence. His answer to accusations: "it couldn't have happened, she's not hot enough!"

He doesn't seem to understand how sexist a response this is ... & worse, how stupid it is from the point of view of his electoral prospects.

 

[Dotini]

What really (among many, many other things) disqualifies Trump from the Presidency is not so much the possibility of a continuing history of sexual misdeeds, it's his inability to address it with any maturity or intelligence. His answer to accusations: "it couldn't have happened, she's not hot enough!"

He doesn't seem to understand how sexist a response this is ... & worse, how stupid it is from the point of view of his electoral prospects.

Do you suddenly cherish his prospects? Why worry?

No matter how disqualified he may be, he is nonetheless on the ballot, and if elected will be president. Sadly, the same thing is true of his opponent.

 

[Biggles]

Do you suddenly cherish his prospects? Why worry?

No matter how disqualified he may be, he is nonetheless on the ballot, and if elected will be president. Sadly, the same thing is true of his opponent.

I don't "worry". I cherish his prospects about as much as he "cherishes women"!

 

[Sanji Himura]

You can't be serious. I won't do the hard maths but I imagine the probabilty of a phrase from her statement closely matching by chance any phrase, in any culturally known piece of text, is incredibly high. Her claim could be total rubbish, but a blooming Velvet Underground song isn't remotely proof of that, I'm amazed you think it could be.

Your story will only be as weak as the weakest link. If I can find one instance of the story being fishy, what are the odds that the rest of it being just as fishy?

That isn't to say, however, that the song couldn't have been used to describe what Trump did made her feel, but if there is other instances where she was "reading from a script", then the whole thing stinks.

 

[samurai8juice]

The Wall Street Journal now admits the press has been burying all of Hillary's sins.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-press-buries-hillary-clintons-sins-1476401308

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-...ess-consistently-buries-hillary-clintons-sins

"The juiciest of the Podesta leaks" according to USAToday:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...four-juiciest-leaked-podesta-emails/92014368/

Hillary is a saint. Nothing else here. Greatest first lady in the history of the United States, greatest New York State senator, and greatest Secretary of State, I mean, she puts Thomas Jefferson to shame.



There's gotta be someone out there that would rather see Bernie Madoff than Donald Trump as President.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Oh, by the way, there is new evidence out there that Trump accuser Jessica Leeds has stolen her story word for word from a 1968 Velvet Underground song. I have included the relevant section below:

As has been pointed out, it's a pretty common way of describing a sexual assault.

Furthermore, a second Trump accuser (this time Summer Zervos, the woman who was often seen with Clinton supporter Gloria Allred) tried to get a job with Trump AFTER she accused him of sexually assaulting her two years after his alleged 2007 assault. Furthermore, as recently as last year, Ms. Zervos attempted to reach out to him for business advice.

Thousands of women who are victims of sexual assault or harassment are forced to work alongside their abusers every day. Some of them even do it willingly - particularly when their abuser is in a position of power - because they feel that speaking out will turn them into a pariah. Just because Zervos had subsequent contact with Trump, it doesn't mean that she's lying.

 

[TenEightyOne]

Trump has never been investigated for a crime

Apart from when he was investigated for a crime, obviously.

Of course, I'd be the first to point out that a duty of investigation doesn't necessary equal a duty to convict.

 

[TRGTspecialist]

If I can find one instance of the story being fishy

Which you didn't, you found a coincidence that is (I believe) very likely to occur.