smackeddog wrote:

holfresh wrote:Colin Powell classic line on Trump...

Powell suggested in another email that even critical coverage of Trump didn't really work: "To go on and call him an idiot just emboldens him."

Calling him an idiot is irresistible but counter productive because the depressing truth is a large chunk of Americans share his stupid views, by insulting him you insult them which makes them less likely to listen to you and more likely to support him. People believe what emotionally resonates with them- if they feel particularly strongly then there is no reasoning with them because they will just distort and deny any information that contradicts how they feel.

Might be more effective to just focus on the fact he's a con man- he's a complete bull****ter- back in the times of the wild west he'd be honking his wagon from town to town selling his miracle wonder-tonic.

Well the guy has already beat back 16 competitors and he is their nominee...His supporters are all in...The fact that there are independents on the fence wringing the hands wondering who to choose is just mind blowing...

GoNyGoNyGo wrote:

martin wrote:

GoNyGoNyGo wrote:

martin wrote:

GoNyGoNyGo wrote:

martin wrote:

GoNyGoNyGo wrote:

martin wrote:

GoNyGoNyGo wrote:

martin wrote:so Newsweek is stepping up. Haven't read the articles but they should be interesting.

http://www.newsweek.com/2016/09/23/george-w-bush-white-house-lost-22-million-emails-497373.html

http://www.newsweek.com/2016/09/23/donald-trump-foreign-business-deals-national-security-498081.html

Both articles are troubling. Missing emails that were requested for an investigation should be turned over. IF not, there should be prosecution.

Trump's interests are also deep and involved. If you are concerned about them as you should be, is there an equal concern about the Clinton Foundation and the possible ramifications that could have on HRC winning?

I will say it again. We, the People have allowed this to occur. We nominate and elect these crooks. Politician should not be a career choice. IT was never meant to be.

Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

There is absolutely concern. There have been investigations looking into those concerns and yet nothing has really popped.

There should be concerns with SuperPACs THAT INVOLVE EVERY SINGLE HIGH LEVEL politician. SuperPACs, as far as I can tell, are exactly the same type of vehicle as a charity except for the exact purpose a charity described above should NOT be doing.... funneling money to a government official for bought influence. Those are vehicles for companies AND foreign nationals via companies to buy influence.

We have companies that donate to politicians, politicians turn around and ASK those donors to literally write laws/legislation for them. We understand this, right? The oil companies donate directly to Senate and Congress members or via SuperPACs and then literally write legislation for those Senate and Congressional members. We have this base line understanding right? That is direct pay for play that happens all the time, commonly accepted pay for play. No outrage. Climate deniers, NRA members. Those are paid for.

BUT, Clinton is associated with a charity that we have found no wrongdoing and.... and what?

Not sure about that, but we will see.

I can't argue with the rest that you have written. Only it is both sides of every argument out there that is dirtying the waters. Nothing is sacred. How we get the genie back in the bottle, I don't know but until it happens, this is why we get HRC vs DJT

GoNyGoNyGo, this is VERY easy. If you are not sure the Clinton Foundation has done no wrongdoing, then produce something that justifies your concern. CF has been around for a very long time and has been investigated and looked at. Show us something that meets YOUR level of concern.

"2 weeks ago, emails were leaked e-mails began dribbling out showing foundation officials contacting State Department counterparts to ask favors for foundation “friends.” Say, a meeting with the State Department’s “substance person” on Lebanon for one particularly generous Lebanese-Nigerian billionaire. Big deal, said the Clinton defenders. Low-level stuff. No involvement of the secretary herself. Until — drip, drip — the next batch revealed foundation requests for face time with the secretary herself. Such as one from the crown prince of Bahrain. To be sure, Bahrain, home of the Fifth Fleet, is an important Persian Gulf ally. Its crown prince shouldn’t have to go through a foundation — to which his government donated at least $50,000 — to get to the secretary. The fact that he did is telling. A further drip: The Associated Press found that over half the private interests who were granted phone or personal contact with Secretary Clinton — 85 of 154 — were donors to the foundation. Total contributions? As much as $156 million. Current Clinton response? There was no quid pro quo."

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/439376/hillary-clinton-corruption-clinton-foundation-email-scandals-are-connected
another source...i know you wont like them but they are the first ones that came up...

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/273930-documents-show-coordination-between-state-clinton

Know your sources. The first link was written by Charles Krauthammer, that should stop you dead in your tracks from reading the article further.

Why? Are his facts wrong. Dispute the facts not the messenger. Can I then question the Newsweek sources as being equally biased the other way?

I'd normally agree with you but Charles Krauthamme is a very well known conservative hack.

Fine - but be prepared to have some of your sources similarly out of hand dismissed.

The emails supporting him are out there.

from CNN http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/11/politics/hillary-clinton-cgi-cheryl-mills/ - she is doing what HRC wants her to do. This is even after HRC signed an agreement before being SOS that she would not mix CF business with SOS duties.

Are you familiar with Charles Krauthamme? Read his stuff before and have a good idea how slanted he is?

I've said this before: Everyone has some sort of slant and I'm OK with that, understand a person's point of view and you can take their description of what they are writing about with that in mind. I'm not wasting my time reading Charles Krauthamme and neither should you.

smackeddog wrote:

holfresh wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

holfresh wrote:Colin Powell classic line on Trump...

Powell suggested in another email that even critical coverage of Trump didn't really work: "To go on and call him an idiot just emboldens him."

Calling him an idiot is irresistible but counter productive because the depressing truth is a large chunk of Americans share his stupid views, by insulting him you insult them which makes them less likely to listen to you and more likely to support him. People believe what emotionally resonates with them- if they feel particularly strongly then there is no reasoning with them because they will just distort and deny any information that contradicts how they feel.

Might be more effective to just focus on the fact he's a con man- he's a complete bull****ter- back in the times of the wild west he'd be honking his wagon from town to town selling his miracle wonder-tonic.

Well the guy has already beat back 16 competitors and he is their nominee...His supporters are all in...The fact that there are independents on the fence wringing the hands wondering who to choose is just mind blowing...

Yup, depressing times- I think he'll win. If the independents haven't been turned off him by now (after all the crap he's spewed) then likely they're not going to be turned off him.

All he needs to do a stand up straight behind a podium, don't curse and they will say he looks Presidential...

GoNyGoNyGo wrote:

martin wrote:

GoNyGoNyGo wrote:

martin wrote:

GoNyGoNyGo wrote:

martin wrote:

GoNyGoNyGo wrote:

martin wrote:

GoNyGoNyGo wrote:

martin wrote:so Newsweek is stepping up. Haven't read the articles but they should be interesting.

http://www.newsweek.com/2016/09/23/george-w-bush-white-house-lost-22-million-emails-497373.html

http://www.newsweek.com/2016/09/23/donald-trump-foreign-business-deals-national-security-498081.html

Both articles are troubling. Missing emails that were requested for an investigation should be turned over. IF not, there should be prosecution.

Trump's interests are also deep and involved. If you are concerned about them as you should be, is there an equal concern about the Clinton Foundation and the possible ramifications that could have on HRC winning?

I will say it again. We, the People have allowed this to occur. We nominate and elect these crooks. Politician should not be a career choice. IT was never meant to be.

Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

There is absolutely concern. There have been investigations looking into those concerns and yet nothing has really popped.

There should be concerns with SuperPACs THAT INVOLVE EVERY SINGLE HIGH LEVEL politician. SuperPACs, as far as I can tell, are exactly the same type of vehicle as a charity except for the exact purpose a charity described above should NOT be doing.... funneling money to a government official for bought influence. Those are vehicles for companies AND foreign nationals via companies to buy influence.

We have companies that donate to politicians, politicians turn around and ASK those donors to literally write laws/legislation for them. We understand this, right? The oil companies donate directly to Senate and Congress members or via SuperPACs and then literally write legislation for those Senate and Congressional members. We have this base line understanding right? That is direct pay for play that happens all the time, commonly accepted pay for play. No outrage. Climate deniers, NRA members. Those are paid for.

BUT, Clinton is associated with a charity that we have found no wrongdoing and.... and what?

Not sure about that, but we will see.

I can't argue with the rest that you have written. Only it is both sides of every argument out there that is dirtying the waters. Nothing is sacred. How we get the genie back in the bottle, I don't know but until it happens, this is why we get HRC vs DJT

GoNyGoNyGo, this is VERY easy. If you are not sure the Clinton Foundation has done no wrongdoing, then produce something that justifies your concern. CF has been around for a very long time and has been investigated and looked at. Show us something that meets YOUR level of concern.

"2 weeks ago, emails were leaked e-mails began dribbling out showing foundation officials contacting State Department counterparts to ask favors for foundation “friends.” Say, a meeting with the State Department’s “substance person” on Lebanon for one particularly generous Lebanese-Nigerian billionaire. Big deal, said the Clinton defenders. Low-level stuff. No involvement of the secretary herself. Until — drip, drip — the next batch revealed foundation requests for face time with the secretary herself. Such as one from the crown prince of Bahrain. To be sure, Bahrain, home of the Fifth Fleet, is an important Persian Gulf ally. Its crown prince shouldn’t have to go through a foundation — to which his government donated at least $50,000 — to get to the secretary. The fact that he did is telling. A further drip: The Associated Press found that over half the private interests who were granted phone or personal contact with Secretary Clinton — 85 of 154 — were donors to the foundation. Total contributions? As much as $156 million. Current Clinton response? There was no quid pro quo."

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/439376/hillary-clinton-corruption-clinton-foundation-email-scandals-are-connected
another source...i know you wont like them but they are the first ones that came up...

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/273930-documents-show-coordination-between-state-clinton

Know your sources. The first link was written by Charles Krauthammer, that should stop you dead in your tracks from reading the article further.

Why? Are his facts wrong. Dispute the facts not the messenger. Can I then question the Newsweek sources as being equally biased the other way?

I'd normally agree with you but Charles Krauthamme is a very well known conservative hack.

Fine - but be prepared to have some of your sources similarly out of hand dismissed.

The emails supporting him are out there.

from CNN http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/11/politics/hillary-clinton-cgi-cheryl-mills/ - she is doing what HRC wants her to do. This is even after HRC signed an agreement before being SOS that she would not mix CF business with SOS duties.

So, regarding the article. Cheryl Mills is a top aid to Hilary. Cheryl was asked by Hilary to help interview candidates for a position at the foundation. Cheryl was not paid for this work, her work was voluntary (or so she claims).

Are you to suggest that any person that is working within the State Department cannot do volunteer work? Or just can't do volunteer work for the Clinton Foundation? And if they do, it's what? Illegal? Conflict of interest? Cheryl Mills, and thus Hilary, has a conflict of interest because Cheryl was asked to help interview candidates for a position at the foundation?

Am I missing something untoward? What's the smoke that leads to the fire? What if Hilary asked Cheryl to make a phone call to the foundation? Is that bad? Is that slimy?

martin wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

holfresh wrote:Colin Powell classic line on Trump...

Powell suggested in another email that even critical coverage of Trump didn't really work: "To go on and call him an idiot just emboldens him."

Calling him an idiot is irresistible but counter productive because the depressing truth is a large chunk of Americans share his stupid views, by insulting him you insult them which makes them less likely to listen to you and more likely to support him. People believe what emotionally resonates with them- if they feel particularly strongly then there is no reasoning with them because they will just distort and deny any information that contradicts how they feel.

Might be more effective to just focus on the fact he's a con man- he's a complete bull****ter- back in the times of the wild west he'd be honking his wagon from town to town selling his miracle wonder-tonic.

No doubt Trump is a showman an exaggerator a narcissist. But I think he kind of gets some common things and if he had acted like he has over the last 3-4 weeks the whole time this would be a walk away. Hes the only candidate who has talked about rebuilding infrastructure controlling illegal immigration helping curb drugs pouring into the uS via Mexico helping our military restructure itself working on behalf of Americans to provide more jobs. He has the energy and the will--hes listening to two women who have done a great job with him--that shows flexibility--he has gone to Mexico into the inner cities--hes giving effort and trying. Like the post says "where is Hillary" she's done none of these things. I don't think trump is a bad guy he seems to have very nice pro active intelligent children. Hes taken care of his daughter from a previous marriage. None of the ex wives are coming out and slamming him. Hes said some stupid things a long the way--but hes also been non stop at this for 14 months. Hes worked hard for the job--I think he deserves it. I ws once a Hillary fan but Im not anymore. Shes a tired woman--she's a manipulative dishonest woman with much less bonafides that I thought she had. If Colin Powell said anything in those emails--my biggest take away--EVERYONE HATES HILLARY. To me thats God awful--thats her direct colleague.

This is funny to me. You keep saying Hilary is doing none of those thing cause you refuse to read anything about her or anything about what she is currently doing or proposing. That's obvious, right?

What has Trump every done in his life that would suggest to you that he would help other people? That he would make a good Civil Servant?

Hillary is worth over 200mm $ from working her "civil liberties" job. Trump doesnt have to do this--the guy could be sitting on the beach. He's doing it for the right reasons and hes working hard to get the job. I think Trump has the respect of the police fire fighters military border patrol and Hillary is a distant second.

BRIGGS wrote:He has the energy and the will--hes listening to two women who have done a great job with him--that shows flexibility--

Wait - what? That's flexibility?

smackeddog wrote:

holfresh wrote:Colin Powell classic line on Trump...

Powell suggested in another email that even critical coverage of Trump didn't really work: "To go on and call him an idiot just emboldens him."

Calling him an idiot is irresistible but counter productive because the depressing truth is a large chunk of Americans share his stupid views, by insulting him you insult them which makes them less likely to listen to you and more likely to support him. People believe what emotionally resonates with them- if they feel particularly strongly then there is no reasoning with them because they will just distort and deny any information that contradicts how they feel.

Might be more effective to just focus on the fact he's a con man- he's a complete bull****ter- back in the times of the wild west he'd be honking his wagon from town to town selling his miracle wonder-tonic.

holfresh wrote:

nixluva wrote:

martin wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

holfresh wrote:Colin Powell classic line on Trump...

Powell suggested in another email that even critical coverage of Trump didn't really work: "To go on and call him an idiot just emboldens him."

Calling him an idiot is irresistible but counter productive because the depressing truth is a large chunk of Americans share his stupid views, by insulting him you insult them which makes them less likely to listen to you and more likely to support him. People believe what emotionally resonates with them- if they feel particularly strongly then there is no reasoning with them because they will just distort and deny any information that contradicts how they feel.

Might be more effective to just focus on the fact he's a con man- he's a complete bull****ter- back in the times of the wild west he'd be honking his wagon from town to town selling his miracle wonder-tonic.

No doubt Trump is a showman an exaggerator a narcissist. But I think he kind of gets some common things and if he had acted like he has over the last 3-4 weeks the whole time this would be a walk away. Hes the only candidate who has talked about rebuilding infrastructure controlling illegal immigration helping curb drugs pouring into the uS via Mexico helping our military restructure itself working on behalf of Americans to provide more jobs. He has the energy and the will--hes listening to two women who have done a great job with him--that shows flexibility--he has gone to Mexico into the inner cities--hes giving effort and trying. Like the post says "where is Hillary" she's done none of these things. I don't think trump is a bad guy he seems to have very nice pro active intelligent children. Hes taken care of his daughter from a previous marriage. None of the ex wives are coming out and slamming him. Hes said some stupid things a long the way--but hes also been non stop at this for 14 months. Hes worked hard for the job--I think he deserves it. I ws once a Hillary fan but Im not anymore. Shes a tired woman--she's a manipulative dishonest woman with much less bonafides that I thought she had. If Colin Powell said anything in those emails--my biggest take away--EVERYONE HATES HILLARY. To me thats God awful--thats her direct colleague.

This is funny to me. You keep saying Hilary is doing none of those thing cause you refuse to read anything about her or anything about what she is currently doing or proposing. That's obvious, right?

What has Trump every done in his life that would suggest to you that he would help other people? That he would make a good Civil Servant?

When you live in the Bubble you have no idea what the hell is going on outside the Bubble. People that are actually believing this garbage Trump is saying are being fooled cuz they want to be fooled. They refuse to believe he actually is the No Nothing Blow Hard that he's shown himself to be. Just cuz he's been reading the speeches someone else has written for him recently doesn't mean he really understands these things or that he really believes in all of these things. He's pretending to be sincere. How you know is that he's NEVER in his life been interested in or done anything to show that he really believes in these things. He's been on both sides of many issues. So what does he really believe in?

Trump hired Undocumented workers and didn't pay them. Trump has stiffed many American workers and companies. Trump has made most of his products in other countries. Trump thinks Salaries are too high in America and doesn't believe in the Minimum wage increase. In what way is he a champion for the worker?

For some reason you think facts will sway Trump supporters...You have seen the multitudes present the facts in these pages and they ignore it...Politifact say Trump says the truth 4% of the times and his supporters sings praises about what he will do...The man bought a 6 foot portrait of himself with other peoples donated charity money...Obama said I guess we should applaud him for not opting for the 10 foot portrait...

They've been duped by the Conservatives for decades but in Red State America they continue to keep voting for Republicans. How quickly they've forgotten JUST WHO RUINED THE ECONOMY!!! They put Bush in office and all the Republicans in Congress that have put the brakes on this economy and blocked the increase in the minimum wage! They gave us Billions lost due to nearly defaulting on the debt and they gave us the Sequester. The Republicans have literally stopped this country from growing more the last 7+ years.

martin wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:After debate #1 Im predicting this will all be over.

Over for Trump? I agree

I have said it before. Hillary will win in a landslide. The elector map is heavily in her favor.

BRIGGS wrote:

martin wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:After debate #1 Im predicting this will all be over.

Over for Trump? I agree

I have said it before. Hillary will win in a landslide. The elector map is heavily in her favor.

Whats a landslide--and what odds are you giving:) Give me 5-1 for 1,000$ and Im in if youre confident. Just send me an address and Ill send the 1k if I lose.

No thanks. I do get a kick out of those who I think are otherwise smart people who are getting the wool pulled over their eyes and who are tying themselves to an otherwise disgusting, lying, racist dude who has never helped anyone in his life and has otherwise conned people to thinking he would do so because he loves America. He has zero policies that make sense - Mexico Wall? - and zero track record of public service (charity, companies that have shined bright, anything?). Follow who you like cause he beats his chest the loudest and puts on a good reality show (Dr Oz anyone, is this what Presidential candidates do?). It's why America is declining and others around the world think we are zany.