[ IMAGES: Images ON turn off | ACCOUNT: User Status is LOCKED why? ]

Where the heck is Hillary Clinton?
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum
Page 244 of 279 « First‹ Previous 242  243  244  245  246 Next ›Last »
Topic LOCKED
Author Thread
nixluva
Posts: 56258
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/5/2004
Member: #758
USA
11/16/2016  11:18 AM
All the Holier than thou BS that Trump and the Republicans argued against Clinton and they have Paid Speeches and entanglements with foreign governments and entities on a much more troubling scale. Trump owning Hundreds of Millions to Foreign Banks is just one thing. Rudy Giuliani has his own issues.

Giuliani took money from Qatar, Venezuela, Iranian exiles
His foreign clientele could present conflicts of interest as secretary of state.

By ISAAC ARNSDORF 11/15/16 11:33 AM EST

Rudy Giuliani's paid consulting for foreign governments would present conflicts of interest as the nation's top diplomat that would make the Clinton Foundation look trifling.

Since leaving the New York mayor's office, Giuliani has made millions as a lawyer and consultant, including for some clients at odds with U.S. foreign policy. When some of those ties surfaced amid Giuliani's own presidential bid in 2007, they were considered to pose an unprecedented number of ethical quandaries for a potential commander in chief.

Now those concerns have no doubt been eclipsed by Donald Trump's own web of business entanglements, which are still not completely known to the public. Giuliani's participation in Trump's transition and contention for the job of secretary of state poses a direct challenge to Trump's promises to root out Washington self-dealing and ban his administration's officials from lobbying for foreign governments.

In 2011, an exiled Iranian political party called the Mujahedin e-Khalq, known as the MEK, paid Giuliani to give a speech in Washington calling on the State Department to remove the group from its list of terrorist organizations. The MEK recruited a host of other formal officials to its cause and succeeded in reversing the terrorist designation in 2012.

A subsidiary of Giuliani's consulting firm, Giuliani Partners, advised Qatar's state-run oil company on security at a natural gas plant, The Wall Street Journal reported. Qatar is a U.S. ally that hosts a major American military base but once stifled an attempt to arrest Khalid Sheikh Mohammad, who went on to mastermind the Sept. 11 attacks, according to the 9/11 commission report.

The same subsidiary, Giuliani Security & Safety, provided security advice to a Singapore gambling project on behalf of a partnership that included a tycoon close to the North Korean regime who is considered an organized crime figure by the U.S., according to a report in the Chicago Tribune. "I think the person involved, if it's correct, was a 1 percent owner that had no involvement with us, we never worked for, had nothing to do with," Giuliani told NBC's Tim Russert at the time.

Giuliani Partners also advised TransCanada, which sought to build the Keystone XL pipeline that President Barack Obama rejected but Trump has said he wants to approve. And Giuliani helped the maker of the OxyContin painkiller, Purdue Pharma, settle a Drug Enforcement Administration investigation with a fine.

The Houston-based law firm Giuliani joined as a named partner in 2005 lobbied in Texas for Citgo, the U.S. subsidiary of the Venezuelan state oil company then controlled by President Hugo Chavez, The New York Times reported in 2007. The firm also did work for Saudi Arabia's oil ministry, according to The Associated Press.

The law firm, Bracewell & Giuliani, lobbied at the federal level during Giuliani's time there for energy companies including Southern Company, Duke Energy, Energy Future Holdings, Arch Coal, Chesapeake Energy and NuStar Energy, records show. It also represented Cornell Companies, a private prison operator that later merged with GEO Group. Giuliani never personally registered as a lobbyist. He left the firm for rival Greenberg Traurig this year, and currently is on leave.

Giuliani's assistant at Greenberg Traurig and the Trump transition didn't answer requests for comment.

The Clinton Foundation has been hounded by Republican suspicions of selling access to Hillary Clinton as secretary of state, and the nonprofit did accept big bucks from foreign governments. But Clinton's defenders point out there's no proof she ever made an official act to benefit a foundation donor, and, unlike Giuliani, she never personally profited from the foreign contributions to her charity.

When Giuliani ran for president, he reported assets of $18.1 million to $70.4 million.

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/giuliani-foreign-clientele-possible-conflicts-231413

TRUMP HYPOCRISY is at unreal levels.
AUTOADVERT
earthmansurfer
Posts: 24005
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/26/2005
Member: #858
Germany
11/16/2016  11:30 AM
meloshouldgo wrote:
earthmansurfer wrote:
I don't think I've had a strong stance against immigrants here. I'm not really even for building a wall separating us with Mexico, but at least fixing the fence.
What are you alluding too with my stance on immigrants? I do think that we need to vet/background check (as best we can) immigrants coming in from States where there are terrorists and America is involved with bombing, droning, etc. I'm pretty sure this happens anyway. Is there something wrong with this?

Hillary pushed Obama into Libya - 30,000 dead. She voted for Iraq and was for Afghanistan. She seems to have an aggressive stance in general. She has a very aggressive stance on Russia with the Wikileaks emails, and had no evidence. She might not start a war right away, but her cold war was already under way. Me and others, quite a few, really were worried about war with Russia eventually. Quite a few people here in Germany said the same thing, a bit of an undercurrent.

This thread gets pretty emotional (it seems) at times. And I do try to be careful usually, sometimes it is tongue and cheek with joking, I get that. But with protests happening, be it George Soros supported/funded or not, I do not want to help divide the country further. Me or anyone "for" Trump and what not, are not an enemy. We have to learn to get along better. Even though he may have policies and such that we don't like (and I've stated what I don't like), it seems things are starting to get out of control. I'll take responsibility in general, but where this may go is really ugly.

You have said immigrants are a problem. Legal immigrants are fully vetted when they enter the US. Illegal immigrants can't be vetted. If you want all illegal immigrants send back because they can't be vetted that's fine. It's a low priority problem to fixate on in my opinion.

You keep saying people dying in Lybia is Hillary'S fault. This is pure baseless right wing talking point. Without war Gaddafi would have slaughtered people. Libya's inability to govern itself after the war is not an US problem. The Libyan ambassador to the UN has said so himself. I have more faith in that country's ambassador than I have in your empty right wing talking points.

She voted for the war in Iraq because she was like everyone else intentionally lied to by Bush and the neocons ruining the country. It wasn't a smart thing to do, but it doesn't make her war happy it makes her gullible.

Your only accusation that had any substance is that she blamed the Russian Govt for wikileaks. To make that into a potential threat to start a war with Russia is just plain stupid.

Where have I said that immigrants are a problem? The only thing I remember saying is that it is dangerous to allow people into the country from States supporting or having terrorism.
And regarding illegal immigrants being sent back, even then I would put a condition on that - violent offenders, hate crimes, etc. (nothing small like Cannabis use, etc.)

We are not the world police. It is not our job to go into other countries and destabilize them. It is CLEAR that Obama didn't want to go in Libya and just as clear that Hillary was a driving force. Hillary was told by senior military people what would happen and it did. If my president can't listen to war experts, so to speak, no thanks. That IS war happy.
Who went to prison for those 1 million dead in Iraq, the false information? Exactly...

The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift. Albert Einstein
earthmansurfer
Posts: 24005
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/26/2005
Member: #858
Germany
11/16/2016  11:36 AM
holfresh wrote:

And the reality show theme...



It is great that Trump is in touch with people. He is a person, not a globalist elite. And the results are already showing, despite a corrupt media, a failing one I might add.

Trump win is an opportunity for UK-US trading relationship - PM May http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-usa-trump-britain-trade-idUKKBN13B1KP

Holfresh, surprised you didn't mention this:
All lobbyists have been cut from Trump’s transition team
https://www.businessinsider.nl/trump-transition-team-lobbyists-2016-11/?international=true&r=US

The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift. Albert Einstein
earthmansurfer
Posts: 24005
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/26/2005
Member: #858
Germany
11/16/2016  11:37 AM
holfresh wrote:Buildings in Manhattan are beginning to dump Trump's name...

NY and CA are strongly democratic. Trump is working on making America great again, not supporting a corrupt banking system that has been stealing from people via Inflation.

The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift. Albert Einstein
holfresh
Posts: 38679
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/14/2006
Member: #1081
11/16/2016  11:38 AM
nixluva wrote:All the Holier than thou BS that Trump and the Republicans argued against Clinton and they have Paid Speeches and entanglements with foreign governments and entities on a much more troubling scale. Trump owning Hundreds of Millions to Foreign Banks is just one thing. Rudy Giuliani has his own issues.

Giuliani took money from Qatar, Venezuela, Iranian exiles
His foreign clientele could present conflicts of interest as secretary of state.

By ISAAC ARNSDORF 11/15/16 11:33 AM EST

Rudy Giuliani's paid consulting for foreign governments would present conflicts of interest as the nation's top diplomat that would make the Clinton Foundation look trifling.

Since leaving the New York mayor's office, Giuliani has made millions as a lawyer and consultant, including for some clients at odds with U.S. foreign policy. When some of those ties surfaced amid Giuliani's own presidential bid in 2007, they were considered to pose an unprecedented number of ethical quandaries for a potential commander in chief.

Now those concerns have no doubt been eclipsed by Donald Trump's own web of business entanglements, which are still not completely known to the public. Giuliani's participation in Trump's transition and contention for the job of secretary of state poses a direct challenge to Trump's promises to root out Washington self-dealing and ban his administration's officials from lobbying for foreign governments.

In 2011, an exiled Iranian political party called the Mujahedin e-Khalq, known as the MEK, paid Giuliani to give a speech in Washington calling on the State Department to remove the group from its list of terrorist organizations. The MEK recruited a host of other formal officials to its cause and succeeded in reversing the terrorist designation in 2012.

A subsidiary of Giuliani's consulting firm, Giuliani Partners, advised Qatar's state-run oil company on security at a natural gas plant, The Wall Street Journal reported. Qatar is a U.S. ally that hosts a major American military base but once stifled an attempt to arrest Khalid Sheikh Mohammad, who went on to mastermind the Sept. 11 attacks, according to the 9/11 commission report.

The same subsidiary, Giuliani Security & Safety, provided security advice to a Singapore gambling project on behalf of a partnership that included a tycoon close to the North Korean regime who is considered an organized crime figure by the U.S., according to a report in the Chicago Tribune. "I think the person involved, if it's correct, was a 1 percent owner that had no involvement with us, we never worked for, had nothing to do with," Giuliani told NBC's Tim Russert at the time.

Giuliani Partners also advised TransCanada, which sought to build the Keystone XL pipeline that President Barack Obama rejected but Trump has said he wants to approve. And Giuliani helped the maker of the OxyContin painkiller, Purdue Pharma, settle a Drug Enforcement Administration investigation with a fine.

The Houston-based law firm Giuliani joined as a named partner in 2005 lobbied in Texas for Citgo, the U.S. subsidiary of the Venezuelan state oil company then controlled by President Hugo Chavez, The New York Times reported in 2007. The firm also did work for Saudi Arabia's oil ministry, according to The Associated Press.

The law firm, Bracewell & Giuliani, lobbied at the federal level during Giuliani's time there for energy companies including Southern Company, Duke Energy, Energy Future Holdings, Arch Coal, Chesapeake Energy and NuStar Energy, records show. It also represented Cornell Companies, a private prison operator that later merged with GEO Group. Giuliani never personally registered as a lobbyist. He left the firm for rival Greenberg Traurig this year, and currently is on leave.

Giuliani's assistant at Greenberg Traurig and the Trump transition didn't answer requests for comment.

The Clinton Foundation has been hounded by Republican suspicions of selling access to Hillary Clinton as secretary of state, and the nonprofit did accept big bucks from foreign governments. But Clinton's defenders point out there's no proof she ever made an official act to benefit a foundation donor, and, unlike Giuliani, she never personally profited from the foreign contributions to her charity.

When Giuliani ran for president, he reported assets of $18.1 million to $70.4 million.

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/giuliani-foreign-clientele-possible-conflicts-231413

TRUMP HYPOCRISY is at unreal levels.

And how about the republican party is now on a BIG SPENDING footing...Just like Bush, and just like Reagan...Trump is ready to blow out the debt even further and they always, always, always say the Democrats are responsible for the huge debt...It's just truly amazing...
earthmansurfer
Posts: 24005
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/26/2005
Member: #858
Germany
11/16/2016  11:39 AM
holfresh wrote:
Welpee wrote:Also of interest, the four other elections in which the popular vote winner didn't win the election:

1824, John Quincy Adams vs Andrew Jackson - Jackson received 38,000 more votes.

1876, Rutherford B. Hayes vs Samuel J. Tilden - Tilden received 250,000 more votes.

1888, Benjamin Harrison vs Grover Cleveland - Cleveland received 90,000 more votes.

2000, George W. Bush vs Al Gore - Gore received 540,000 more votes.

Clinton has currently received 1,160,817 (and still counting) more votes than Trump. I know you have to allow for lower population numbers in the 1800s, but still...

We should never lose sight of the fact that the majority of American voters do not want Trump as president. Good luck believing he has a "mandate."

This is what the country looked like when the electoral college was implemented...

Well, we should have changed it a 100 years ago eh, anyway....

The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift. Albert Einstein
DrAlphaeus
Posts: 23751
Alba Posts: 10
Joined: 12/19/2007
Member: #1781
11/16/2016  11:41 AM
EMS: what do German folks over there in your neck of the woods think of Trump?

Do you have to keep your approval of Trump to yourself over there?

Baba Booey 2016 — "It's Silly Season"
holfresh
Posts: 38679
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/14/2006
Member: #1081
11/16/2016  11:41 AM
earthmansurfer wrote:
holfresh wrote:

And the reality show theme...



It is great that Trump is in touch with people. He is a person, not a globalist elite. And the results are already showing, despite a corrupt media, a failing one I might add.

Trump win is an opportunity for UK-US trading relationship - PM May http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-usa-trump-britain-trade-idUKKBN13B1KP

Holfresh, surprised you didn't mention this:
All lobbyists have been cut from Trump’s transition team
https://www.businessinsider.nl/trump-transition-team-lobbyists-2016-11/?international=true&r=US

That's after Elizabeth Warren blew up the lobbyist party at Trump Tower...She exposed them so Pence pulled the plug...Pene is in court trying to suppress his emails..He doesn't want to public to see it...ahahahhaa...Too funny...
earthmansurfer
Posts: 24005
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/26/2005
Member: #858
Germany
11/16/2016  11:42 AM
DrAlphaeus wrote:
earthmansurfer wrote:
DrAlphaeus wrote:EMS: surprised don't consider yourself an immigrant to Germany. How long have you been living there? In a certain sense you "emigrated" from the US, right? What do you consider yourself: a tourist? Retiree living abroad? You've been there a bunch of years, no?

I guess the "permanent" part of the definition you don't fit. At what point would your status in Germany would be considered immigration? A lot of immigrants to the US, particularly from the Americas, come with the idea that they will only be here for a couple years to earn X amount of money for themselves and their family to eventually return. Some do return to build that dream house, business, or retirement ... are they not immigrants if they are living and working for years abroad? Then of course many of these folks end up living here for the rest of their lives because of social ties and opportunities they create here versus what would be waiting for them back home.

Was surprised to see you read it as "name-calling" when I think it was just a way to describe your status as an American living abroad — not as a tourist but as a resident of some particular immigration status – with no apparent plans to return. What do you call it then?

It seems "permanent" is a big part of the definition (online). I see me coming back to the States - I miss my family and friends. Just in Germany for over 10 years now as that is where life has taken me. I'm not offended per se, with being called an immigrant, but I don't like putting another label on me. And the reasons for being here - I'm not exactly looking for a better life, being persecuted, etc. More like I am a traveler, Earthmansurfer, and currently surfing Germany. (I'm way too young - and poor - to be retired. ;-)

I guess I'm saying things are a bit Semantic. I don't exactly see the point. I've recently mentioning some of my ancestory and am pretty clear about my intentions. I (we) need to be more careful here though. Things are getting heated up, all over.

Peace out Doc.

10 years? Dude, sorry for slapping labels but you emigrated from the US and immigrated to Germany. Or how about calling you an American émigré? It's a fancy label!

The better life/persecution thing is definitionally irrelevant IMHO. The whole leaving one nation to settle in another is the important distinction. Because hey... <in my best hippie voice> there is nothing permanent in this world anyway...

That's all I got from the peanut gallery. Carry on.

PS — I'm certain that you'd be considered an (immigrant to Germany / emigrant from the US) for statistical purposes. If you don't met the strictest dictionary definition, I'm certain "permanent" isn't part of the working definition when we talk about stats and figures or generalize about an "immigrant" problem. Just saying.

PPS — Are you living/working over there illegally?!?

If you want to call me an immigrant, go right ahead. This is purely semantic, I don't see the point.

I was just saying, I wasn't running to a better life or from something.

Of course I'm here legally, lol. You think I would be posting illegal information online?

The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift. Albert Einstein
holfresh
Posts: 38679
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/14/2006
Member: #1081
11/16/2016  11:46 AM
earthmansurfer wrote:
holfresh wrote:Buildings in Manhattan are beginning to dump Trump's name...

NY and CA are strongly democratic. Trump is working on making America great again, not supporting a corrupt banking system that has been stealing from people via Inflation.

hahaha..Inflation..Trump trade war commentary has created inflation..The USD had strengthened which has made imports more expensive...He isn't smart enough to know he needs to shut up because he comments can have global a impact...
Nalod
Posts: 71190
Alba Posts: 155
Joined: 12/24/2003
Member: #508
USA
11/16/2016  11:46 AM
Frank Underwood looks good compared to our mess.
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
11/16/2016  11:46 AM    LAST EDITED: 11/16/2016  11:49 AM
earthmansurfer wrote:
holfresh wrote:
Welpee wrote:Also of interest, the four other elections in which the popular vote winner didn't win the election:

1824, John Quincy Adams vs Andrew Jackson - Jackson received 38,000 more votes.

1876, Rutherford B. Hayes vs Samuel J. Tilden - Tilden received 250,000 more votes.

1888, Benjamin Harrison vs Grover Cleveland - Cleveland received 90,000 more votes.

2000, George W. Bush vs Al Gore - Gore received 540,000 more votes.

Clinton has currently received 1,160,817 (and still counting) more votes than Trump. I know you have to allow for lower population numbers in the 1800s, but still...

We should never lose sight of the fact that the majority of American voters do not want Trump as president. Good luck believing he has a "mandate."

This is what the country looked like when the electoral college was implemented...

Well, we should have changed it a 100 years ago eh, anyway....

This is delusional. If both candidates campaigned really hard in NY and California, it's hard to imagine that benefiting the Republicans. The states are reliably Democratic by huge margins. Trump campaigning there would be about as effective as Hillary campaigning in Mississippi and Wyoming. If we used the popular vote and Hillary focused on getting voters to the polls in CA and NY, she would have won by several million more votes.
earthmansurfer
Posts: 24005
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/26/2005
Member: #858
Germany
11/16/2016  11:53 AM
DrAlphaeus wrote:EMS: what do German folks over there in your neck of the woods think of Trump?

Do you have to keep your approval of Trump to yourself over there?

Great question and I've been wanting to mention it - not really to Trumps advantage either.

My line of work here allows me to talk quit a bit to people, all different ages.
It seems most adults supported Hillary. They are really against outspoken people (look at their past). I've been asking a lot of people lately though, what they think of a Trump presidency. There are not extreme views here like in the States, they say, "Give him a chance." Time and time again they say that.
The younger people, teenagers, really supported Trump and I was shocked. Asked them if it was a household thing and they said "No, we don't talk politics at home."

Interestingly, the separation of gender here, regarding the vote, is not at all prominent. It is less extreme than in America. In a way, there are fewer "Sylvester Stallone" types, and fewer "Barbie Doll" types. I don't mean that judgmentally, just that America is a country of extremes. You can be much much more free making jokes here in companies than in America; there is not the political correctness. Germans are really factually based, almost scientific. Generally, they (those that know) are interested in what Trump will do due to his business background. There is not the hate, but I guess that is to be expected.

Regarding the support for Hillary in Germany (at least that I've personally witnessed) - all of these people get their information from Main Stream Media. They basically heard bad things about Trumps mouth (of course) and heard bad and good things about Hillary. There wasn't a lot said about Trump that was positive. They thought Hillary was professional (but due to the leaks, not trustworthy), but as they say in German, the choice was "Plague or Cholera".

I am pretty outspoken, but I'm careful with my words (and have been trying to be more that way here, as being too strong gets tiring and just divides). Due to a bit of my Justice background I don't ask leading questions, more like "What do you think of the new president? What are the risks, positives, etc?"

If I came back to the States now, honestly, I'd be REAL careful with my political opinions. Here I feel extremely free. Europe is sort of chill, at least Germany and the people travelling through. Really, there is NOT the intensity of character that I remember meeting daily in America.

The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift. Albert Einstein
earthmansurfer
Posts: 24005
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/26/2005
Member: #858
Germany
11/16/2016  11:56 AM
holfresh wrote:
earthmansurfer wrote:
holfresh wrote:Buildings in Manhattan are beginning to dump Trump's name...

NY and CA are strongly democratic. Trump is working on making America great again, not supporting a corrupt banking system that has been stealing from people via Inflation.

hahaha..Inflation..Trump trade war commentary has created inflation..The USD had strengthened which has made imports more expensive...He isn't smart enough to know he needs to shut up because he comments can have global a impact...

I was talking QE. You do realize that putting any decent amount of money in the bank now is like donating it to the bank? Every year it loses buying power.

We need to work on a better deal with China. Sometimes we takes a step back, sometimes they do. The point is to try to make life better for everyone. I don'T want to "beat" China per se. We are all people wanting better lives and not war. Unfortunately, no matter who is president, I see "war" (rather strong military actions) against ISIS coming. We helped dig that hole. No way out of it now. At least Trump is talking with Putin about a joint effort.

The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift. Albert Einstein
earthmansurfer
Posts: 24005
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/26/2005
Member: #858
Germany
11/16/2016  11:58 AM
Bonn1997 wrote:
earthmansurfer wrote:
holfresh wrote:
Welpee wrote:Also of interest, the four other elections in which the popular vote winner didn't win the election:

1824, John Quincy Adams vs Andrew Jackson - Jackson received 38,000 more votes.

1876, Rutherford B. Hayes vs Samuel J. Tilden - Tilden received 250,000 more votes.

1888, Benjamin Harrison vs Grover Cleveland - Cleveland received 90,000 more votes.

2000, George W. Bush vs Al Gore - Gore received 540,000 more votes.

Clinton has currently received 1,160,817 (and still counting) more votes than Trump. I know you have to allow for lower population numbers in the 1800s, but still...

We should never lose sight of the fact that the majority of American voters do not want Trump as president. Good luck believing he has a "mandate."

This is what the country looked like when the electoral college was implemented...

Well, we should have changed it a 100 years ago eh, anyway....

This is delusional. If both candidates campaigned really hard in NY and California, it's hard to imagine that benefiting the Republicans. The states are reliably Democratic by huge margins. Trump campaigning there would be about as effective as Hillary campaigning in Mississippi and Wyoming. If we used the popular vote and Hillary focused on getting voters to the polls in CA and NY, she would have won by several million more votes.

Bonn, the bigger point is, we can't look at the popular vote as the "tell all". Campaigns are scientifically run to get the Electoral vote, not popular vote. That is clear.

The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift. Albert Einstein
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
11/16/2016  12:04 PM
earthmansurfer wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
earthmansurfer wrote:
holfresh wrote:
Welpee wrote:Also of interest, the four other elections in which the popular vote winner didn't win the election:

1824, John Quincy Adams vs Andrew Jackson - Jackson received 38,000 more votes.

1876, Rutherford B. Hayes vs Samuel J. Tilden - Tilden received 250,000 more votes.

1888, Benjamin Harrison vs Grover Cleveland - Cleveland received 90,000 more votes.

2000, George W. Bush vs Al Gore - Gore received 540,000 more votes.

Clinton has currently received 1,160,817 (and still counting) more votes than Trump. I know you have to allow for lower population numbers in the 1800s, but still...

We should never lose sight of the fact that the majority of American voters do not want Trump as president. Good luck believing he has a "mandate."

This is what the country looked like when the electoral college was implemented...

Well, we should have changed it a 100 years ago eh, anyway....

This is delusional. If both candidates campaigned really hard in NY and California, it's hard to imagine that benefiting the Republicans. The states are reliably Democratic by huge margins. Trump campaigning there would be about as effective as Hillary campaigning in Mississippi and Wyoming. If we used the popular vote and Hillary focused on getting voters to the polls in CA and NY, she would have won by several million more votes.

Bonn, the bigger point is, we can't look at the popular vote as the "tell all". Campaigns are scientifically run to get the Electoral vote, not popular vote. That is clear.


You have only two plausible scenarios

Electoral vote system: About 2 million more people preferred Hillary Clinton than Donald Trump. They just didn't live in the states that count.
Popular vote system that gets out the vote in strong Democratic states like California and NY: Likely a much larger than 2 million vote advantage for Hillary
meloshouldgo
Posts: 26565
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 5/3/2014
Member: #5801
11/16/2016  12:16 PM    LAST EDITED: 11/16/2016  12:56 PM
earthmansurfer wrote:
meloshouldgo wrote:
earthmansurfer wrote:
I don't think I've had a strong stance against immigrants here. I'm not really even for building a wall separating us with Mexico, but at least fixing the fence.
What are you alluding too with my stance on immigrants? I do think that we need to vet/background check (as best we can) immigrants coming in from States where there are terrorists and America is involved with bombing, droning, etc. I'm pretty sure this happens anyway. Is there something wrong with this?

Hillary pushed Obama into Libya - 30,000 dead. She voted for Iraq and was for Afghanistan. She seems to have an aggressive stance in general. She has a very aggressive stance on Russia with the Wikileaks emails, and had no evidence. She might not start a war right away, but her cold war was already under way. Me and others, quite a few, really were worried about war with Russia eventually. Quite a few people here in Germany said the same thing, a bit of an undercurrent.

This thread gets pretty emotional (it seems) at times. And I do try to be careful usually, sometimes it is tongue and cheek with joking, I get that. But with protests happening, be it George Soros supported/funded or not, I do not want to help divide the country further. Me or anyone "for" Trump and what not, are not an enemy. We have to learn to get along better. Even though he may have policies and such that we don't like (and I've stated what I don't like), it seems things are starting to get out of control. I'll take responsibility in general, but where this may go is really ugly.

You have said immigrants are a problem. Legal immigrants are fully vetted when they enter the US. Illegal immigrants can't be vetted. If you want all illegal immigrants send back because they can't be vetted that's fine. It's a low priority problem to fixate on in my opinion.

You keep saying people dying in Lybia is Hillary'S fault. This is pure baseless right wing talking point. Without war Gaddafi would have slaughtered people. Libya's inability to govern itself after the war is not an US problem. The Libyan ambassador to the UN has said so himself. I have more faith in that country's ambassador than I have in your empty right wing talking points.

She voted for the war in Iraq because she was like everyone else intentionally lied to by Bush and the neocons ruining the country. It wasn't a smart thing to do, but it doesn't make her war happy it makes her gullible.

Your only accusation that had any substance is that she blamed the Russian Govt for wikileaks. To make that into a potential threat to start a war with Russia is just plain stupid.

Where have I said that immigrants are a problem? The only thing I remember saying is that it is dangerous to allow people into the country from States supporting or having terrorism.
And regarding illegal immigrants being sent back, even then I would put a condition on that - violent offenders, hate crimes, etc. (nothing small like Cannabis use, etc.)

We are not the world police. It is not our job to go into other countries and destabilize them. It is CLEAR that Obama didn't want to go in Libya and just as clear that Hillary was a driving force. Hillary was told by senior military people what would happen and it did. If my president can't listen to war experts, so to speak, no thanks. That IS war happy.
Who went to prison for those 1 million dead in Iraq, the false information? Exactly...

This is where it gets back to you leaving questions unanswered- I asked before and will ask again.

1. Do you seek Bush and Neocons being put in jail or is it Hillary that you are obsessed with? You have more than 20 posts about Hillary on Iraq war and zero posts asking for Republicans to be held accountable - looks a little lopsided to me

2. What expertise do generals have in deciding whether to go to war or not? Their expertise is military not political. We go to war for political reasons. When we are in war you can ask why we are nor listening to them

3. You even said the president should listen to senhor cabinet members about going to war. Then you criticize Hillary for giving that advice and Obama for taking it.

I have run out patience with this discussion, rehashing this with you is not very interesting. I

I cannot teach anybody anything. I can only try to make them think - Socrates
arkrud
Posts: 32217
Alba Posts: 7
Joined: 8/31/2005
Member: #995
USA
11/16/2016  12:22 PM
earthmansurfer wrote:
holfresh wrote:
earthmansurfer wrote:
holfresh wrote:Buildings in Manhattan are beginning to dump Trump's name...

NY and CA are strongly democratic. Trump is working on making America great again, not supporting a corrupt banking system that has been stealing from people via Inflation.

hahaha..Inflation..Trump trade war commentary has created inflation..The USD had strengthened which has made imports more expensive...He isn't smart enough to know he needs to shut up because he comments can have global a impact...

I was talking QE. You do realize that putting any decent amount of money in the bank now is like donating it to the bank? Every year it loses buying power.

We need to work on a better deal with China. Sometimes we takes a step back, sometimes they do. The point is to try to make life better for everyone. I don'T want to "beat" China per se. We are all people wanting better lives and not war. Unfortunately, no matter who is president, I see "war" (rather strong military actions) against ISIS coming. We helped dig that hole. No way out of it now. At least Trump is talking with Putin about a joint effort.

Why anyone in US will keep money in the bank? This is crazy stupid.
With interest rates so low every reasonable person should have as much debt as possible.
I have 50-70K of %0 credit cards debt for 6 years already and used this cash to amass 50K in additional investments in 401K, home equity, and whole-life insurance. And I can close all debt any time if interest rates will jump or I do not get new %0 2-3% fee offers by using my home equity. And my credit ratings are still in 750-800 range.
This how you use the money printed by government and monetize them for yourself.

"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy." Hamlet
Welpee
Posts: 23162
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/22/2016
Member: #6239
11/16/2016  12:24 PM
earthmansurfer wrote:
holfresh wrote:

And the reality show theme...



It is great that Trump is in touch with people. He is a person, not a globalist elite. And the results are already showing, despite a corrupt media, a failing one I might add.

Trump win is an opportunity for UK-US trading relationship - PM May http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-usa-trump-britain-trade-idUKKBN13B1KP

Holfresh, surprised you didn't mention this:
All lobbyists have been cut from Trump’s transition team
https://www.businessinsider.nl/trump-transition-team-lobbyists-2016-11/?international=true&r=US

Translation: he gets to lie directly to his followers versus relying on the media to transmit his lies for him.
Welpee
Posts: 23162
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/22/2016
Member: #6239
11/16/2016  12:34 PM    LAST EDITED: 11/16/2016  12:35 PM
holfresh wrote:
Welpee wrote:Also of interest, the four other elections in which the popular vote winner didn't win the election:

1824, John Quincy Adams vs Andrew Jackson - Jackson received 38,000 more votes.

1876, Rutherford B. Hayes vs Samuel J. Tilden - Tilden received 250,000 more votes.

1888, Benjamin Harrison vs Grover Cleveland - Cleveland received 90,000 more votes.

2000, George W. Bush vs Al Gore - Gore received 540,000 more votes.

Clinton has currently received 1,160,817 (and still counting) more votes than Trump. I know you have to allow for lower population numbers in the 1800s, but still...

We should never lose sight of the fact that the majority of American voters do not want Trump as president. Good luck believing he has a "mandate."

The website I used said that Jackson received 44,800 more votes than Adams in 1824...In the 1824 election Jackson got 43.7% and Adams got 31%...Adams won the election anyway because of the electoral college...I could do this for other years but don't have the time to waste...The electoral college wasn't some scientific method of electing a president..They just thought to give certain states more weight in terms of electing a president for various reasons..Those reasons doesn't apply today...

Actually John Q Adams didn't win the popular and didn't have enough electoral votes to win. The House had to decide the election and from what I remember, JQ Adams and Henry Clay conspired (bribed) enough House members to gain enough votes to win the election.
Page 244 of 279 « First‹ Previous 242  243  244  245  246 Next ›Last »
Topic LOCKED
Where the heck is Hillary Clinton?
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum

©2001-2025 ultimateknicks.comm All rights reserved. About Us.
This site is not affiliated with the NY Knicks or the National Basketball Association in any way.
You may visit the official NY Knicks web site by clicking here.

All times (GMT-05:00) Eastern Time.

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy