Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You have to be blind not to see the enthusiasm for Trump on Long Island. I have never seen this type of support for a Republican candidate in quite a few elections.
He will take Long Island.
I think it can be difficult to see any "enthusiasm for Trump" because it's wrapped in vitriol for so many others.
I wasn't aware that this forum is a CNN RSS feed.
I
Now, tuck tail.
Why do you conservative extremists use Web sites that are hardly relevant as source to your bigoted opinions? Donald is done and a LI victory does much more harm than good for our appearance as corrupt tax paying morons to the rest of the country.
Why do you conservative extremists use Web sites that are hardly relevant as source to your bigoted opinions? Donald is done and a LI victory does much more harm than good for our appearance as corrupt tax paying morons to the rest of the country.
Do you honestly believe that the "rest of the Country" cares about LI? I don't care if you support Hillary or Donald or Donald Duck, the rest of the country does not care what LI thinks or does.
Why do you conservative extremists use Web sites that are hardly relevant as source to your bigoted opinions? Donald is done and a LI victory does much more harm than good for our appearance as corrupt tax paying morons to the rest of the country.
Do you honestly believe that the "rest of the Country" cares about LI? I don't care if you support Hillary or Donald or Donald Duck, the rest of the country does not care what LI thinks or does.
Trump has fairly proven himself to be a repugnant POS. Eventually, you continue to publicly back a POS despite overwhelming evidence, you then become a POS by association. Repubs are dealing with that now as they get crushed down ballot.
Let's face it. As I said earlier. neither of these candidates is ideal.
In fact, they are both very much alike. She lies, he lies. She enables, he enables. She has a foundation that hides money, ditto for him. She disrespects women, so does he.
I honestly don't know why anyone would want to run for the office. I personally have never done anything egregious, but I am sure they could drag up a few things I did earlier in life and make an issue of it. I would love a statute of limitations on things to be dredged up. Clinton infidelity, off the table. Trumps female denigration - off the table. Let's stick to the current issues and be done with this. Can't wait til both of them disappear off my radar screen. Just tired of it. I am so tired of it, that while Hurricane Matthew is nothing other than tragic, I have actually welcomed the change in the coverage.
I whole heartily agree with your 3rd para.
One thing I'm seeing, in this election, is how many look at certain known facts (not rhetoric as facts) and interpret them differently for their candidate or the other.
"In fact, they are both very much alike. She lies, he lies. She enables, he enables. She has a foundation that hides money, ditto for him. She disrespects women, so does he."
Re: "She lies, he lies"
Clinton detractors usually refer to her comments re: email classification when calling her a liar. Negative campaign ads (vs. Clinton) show a clip of her saying she *didn't send or receive classified content in her emails* and a clip of FBI Dir. James Comey saying *classifying content was sent to or from Clinton*.
At first, I thought she got caught lying. But, as I examined the timing and verbiage of Clinton's statements vs. Comey's statements, I can see that it's possible Clinton did not know or, perhaps, did not care to know if "classified" content was being relayed in the emails. So, when she said she "did not send classified material" she really should be saying she "did not knowingly send classified material". If one truthfully speaks about something that they don't know isn't true; it's not a lie.
[Note: "Classified" is one of several designations of material but I'll use it generically.] Different agencies use different means test in determining content classification, as well as, different levels of "classified" classification. Some really stupid stuff is considered "classified" and sometimes one agency will have a bit of info considered "classified" while another agency will have that same bit of info not classified.
Her public statements and testimony do not contradict this possibility and are consistent with each other. So when Comey stated that he believed Clinton wasn't [lying] it's fair that Clinton would say Comey was referring to her public statements, as well.
Clinton did a horrible job at speaking clearly on this matter and her convoluted explanations tend to make one think she's avoiding the question when it's just how she communicates when being attacked. She's very "lawyer-ly" in this respect.
Now, let's briefly look at Trump. Does he lie?
- Spent $68,000 in Cuba to lay the groundwork for business ventures if, as it looked to be happening, US embargo vs Cuba was going to be lifted to some extent. A few months later told Cuban-Americans in Miami that he would never violate the embargo... that $68,000 was an embargo violation as stated on the invoice for the $68,000.
I've got to go make some coffee. You guys think what you want, lol.
Boy is it going to be fun returning to this thread in 4 weeks.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
