THE Political Thread (ALL Political Discussion Here - See Rules, P. 1)
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 1280, 1281, 1282 ... 1287, 1288, 1289  Next

 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> Off Topic Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
ribeye
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 10 Nov 2001
Posts: 8425

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2018 9:39 am    Post subject:

ChickenStu wrote:
DaMuleRules wrote:
Wilt wrote:
Amy Klobuchar says she's considering a run for president.

I think she'd very effective against Trump, especially in a debate. She's quick, smart, and has folksy appeal.


Agreed. The midterms reveal how effective she can be.


I've said this before, but I love Klobuchar. I'm starting to warm to a Beto-Klobuchar ticket (in some order), as I think they balance each other well, similar to how Obama and Biden did. I agree that Amy has that folksy, Midwest appeal that could play well among moderates and independents in that part of the country, and Beto, though young and relatively inexperienced (at least he was a two-term Congressman), obviously has wonderful communication skills and charisma.

My current 3 favorite potential presidential candidates are the two I mentioned above, along with Cory Booker.


Yep, yep, mostly yep. I don't think Cory is ready for prime time. I think Sharrod Brown from OHIO would be a good choice as well (he just won in Ohio by 6 points when the Dem Cordray lost by over 4), but after watching Amy coolly, calmly, and articulately, slice and dice to rattle the new drama queen (king?) in the SCOTUS, she's jumped to the top of my list.
_________________
For the adults in the room only
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 41595
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2018 9:58 am    Post subject:

ribeye wrote:
ChickenStu wrote:
DaMuleRules wrote:
Wilt wrote:
Amy Klobuchar says she's considering a run for president.

I think she'd very effective against Trump, especially in a debate. She's quick, smart, and has folksy appeal.


Agreed. The midterms reveal how effective she can be.


I've said this before, but I love Klobuchar. I'm starting to warm to a Beto-Klobuchar ticket (in some order), as I think they balance each other well, similar to how Obama and Biden did. I agree that Amy has that folksy, Midwest appeal that could play well among moderates and independents in that part of the country, and Beto, though young and relatively inexperienced (at least he was a two-term Congressman), obviously has wonderful communication skills and charisma.

My current 3 favorite potential presidential candidates are the two I mentioned above, along with Cory Booker.


Yep, yep, mostly yep. I don't think Cory is ready for prime time. I think Sharrod Brown from OHIO would be a good choice as well (he just won in Ohio by 6 points when the Dem Cordray lost by over 4), but after watching Amy coolly, calmly, and articulately, slice and dice to rattle the new drama queen (king?) in the SCOTUS, she's jumped to the top of my list.


And this is why I feel it is critical to emphasize candidates who are highly capable, knowledgable and experienced in the political circle and support their run - as opposed to promoting novelty candidates such as the Avenattis and Oprahs (not to imply I believe they are on equal footing in regards to merit).
_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames


Jason Isbell
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LarryCoon
Site Staff
Site Staff


Joined: 11 Aug 2002
Posts: 10186

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2018 10:24 am    Post subject:

DaMuleRules wrote:
And this is why I feel it is critical to emphasize candidates who are highly capable, knowledgable and experienced in the political circle and support their run - as opposed to promoting novelty candidates such as the Avenattis and Oprahs (not to imply I believe they are on equal footing in regards to merit).


I have to admit I'm internally conflicted a little bit.

For example, while I'm 100% pro-choice, I hate that the issue is such a rallying point for the right -- because it means that the issue will get more people off their couches to vote for a candidate so long as he/she supports their sacred cow.

Likewise, the previous two Dem candidates have gotten the racists and misogynists to crawl out of the woodwork and vote for a horrible candidate -- because they see him as sharing their worldview, and validating their opinions.

My internal conflict is that on one hand, I absolutely want the best candidate to show up, and if that candidate represents ethnic and/or gender diversity, I'd consider that a victory -- and I'd welcome the good fight it'd take to achieve that victory. On the other hand, I've seen the consequences when the wrong people can be coaxed out of the woodwork, and the consequences from this can be generational (see Trump's two SCOTUS appointments). So part of me wants the next Dem candidate to be as non-controversial as possible. I hate that the situation makes me feel that way, but part of me DOES feel that way.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 41595
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2018 10:53 am    Post subject:

LarryCoon wrote:
DaMuleRules wrote:
And this is why I feel it is critical to emphasize candidates who are highly capable, knowledgable and experienced in the political circle and support their run - as opposed to promoting novelty candidates such as the Avenattis and Oprahs (not to imply I believe they are on equal footing in regards to merit).


I have to admit I'm internally conflicted a little bit.

For example, while I'm 100% pro-choice, I hate that the issue is such a rallying point for the right -- because it means that the issue will get more people off their couches to vote for a candidate so long as he/she supports their sacred cow.

Likewise, the previous two Dem candidates have gotten the racists and misogynists to crawl out of the woodwork and vote for a horrible candidate -- because they see him as sharing their worldview, and validating their opinions.

My internal conflict is that on one hand, I absolutely want the best candidate to show up, and if that candidate represents ethnic and/or gender diversity, I'd consider that a victory -- and I'd welcome the good fight it'd take to achieve that victory. On the other hand, I've seen the consequences when the wrong people can be coaxed out of the woodwork, and the consequences from this can be generational (see Trump's two SCOTUS appointments). So part of me wants the next Dem candidate to be as non-controversial as possible. I hate that the situation makes me feel that way, but part of me DOES feel that way.


Totally understandable. Hopefully a highly capable and "appropriate" (for lack of a better word) candidate will arise that brings the accomplishment and credibility we need with a minimum of controversy. Though given the current political climate, I fear controversy is going to be unavoidable to some degree.
_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames


Jason Isbell
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
The Juggernaut
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 24 Aug 2017
Posts: 2219

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2018 11:08 am    Post subject:

LarryCoon wrote:
DaMuleRules wrote:
And this is why I feel it is critical to emphasize candidates who are highly capable, knowledgable and experienced in the political circle and support their run - as opposed to promoting novelty candidates such as the Avenattis and Oprahs (not to imply I believe they are on equal footing in regards to merit).


I have to admit I'm internally conflicted a little bit.

For example, while I'm 100% pro-choice, I hate that the issue is such a rallying point for the right -- because it means that the issue will get more people off their couches to vote for a candidate so long as he/she supports their sacred cow.

Likewise, the previous two Dem candidates have gotten the racists and misogynists to crawl out of the woodwork and vote for a horrible candidate -- because they see him as sharing their worldview, and validating their opinions.

My internal conflict is that on one hand, I absolutely want the best candidate to show up, and if that candidate represents ethnic and/or gender diversity, I'd consider that a victory -- and I'd welcome the good fight it'd take to achieve that victory. On the other hand, I've seen the consequences when the wrong people can be coaxed out of the woodwork, and the consequences from this can be generational (see Trump's two SCOTUS appointments). So part of me wants the next Dem candidate to be as non-controversial as possible. I hate that the situation makes me feel that way, but part of me DOES feel that way.


I feel the same way. It sucks that many viable candidates may not be an option for Dems because of this dilemma you outlined. Hopefully we can get a candidate come out of nowhere in the next year that will have the merit to be President while also not motivating the despicables to come out of the woodwork to vote
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
splashmtn
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 30 Aug 2016
Posts: 3295

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2018 11:24 am    Post subject:

The Juggernaut wrote:
LarryCoon wrote:
DaMuleRules wrote:
And this is why I feel it is critical to emphasize candidates who are highly capable, knowledgable and experienced in the political circle and support their run - as opposed to promoting novelty candidates such as the Avenattis and Oprahs (not to imply I believe they are on equal footing in regards to merit).


I have to admit I'm internally conflicted a little bit.

For example, while I'm 100% pro-choice, I hate that the issue is such a rallying point for the right -- because it means that the issue will get more people off their couches to vote for a candidate so long as he/she supports their sacred cow.

Likewise, the previous two Dem candidates have gotten the racists and misogynists to crawl out of the woodwork and vote for a horrible candidate -- because they see him as sharing their worldview, and validating their opinions.

My internal conflict is that on one hand, I absolutely want the best candidate to show up, and if that candidate represents ethnic and/or gender diversity, I'd consider that a victory -- and I'd welcome the good fight it'd take to achieve that victory. On the other hand, I've seen the consequences when the wrong people can be coaxed out of the woodwork, and the consequences from this can be generational (see Trump's two SCOTUS appointments). So part of me wants the next Dem candidate to be as non-controversial as possible. I hate that the situation makes me feel that way, but part of me DOES feel that way.


I feel the same way. It sucks that many viable candidates may not be an option for Dems because of this dilemma you outlined. Hopefully we can get a candidate come out of nowhere in the next year that will have the merit to be President while also not motivating the despicables to come out of the woodwork to vote
you guys are thinking about this the wrong way. Stop being afraid of the fools that we have in this country. Worry about the non fools that arent voting for various reasons or the non fools who just became or will become of age in the coming years. There are more non fools than their are fools. By a very large margin the only issue is getting them to the booth not just once every 4 years but a few more times within those 4 years to vote for congress as well as local state/city stuff.

Stop worrying about the idiots. focus on the non idiots. What do you think will get those non voters or youth to vote?


Last edited by splashmtn on Wed Dec 05, 2018 1:37 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
splashmtn
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 30 Aug 2016
Posts: 3295

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2018 11:32 am    Post subject:

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez promises to pay her interns $15 an hour or more, after slamming unpaid internships in Congress

https://www.businessinsider.com/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-pay-interns-15-an-hour-2018-12
Quote:
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has promised to pay her congressional interns at least $15 an hour.

Her pledge comes days after she slammed her future colleagues in both parties for employing unpaid interns and for not paying staffers a "living wage."

"Very few members of Congress actually pay their interns. We will be one of them," she said Tuesday.

A 2017 report found that just 8% of Republicans and 3.6% of Democrats in the House pay their interns
.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
kikanga
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 15 Sep 2012
Posts: 17955
Location: La La Land

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2018 11:47 am    Post subject:

Dow down another 700 points. Where is adkindo? He was posting in here when the opposite was happening.

The market is tanking.
_________________
Turn your losses into lessons. - Mike "The Situation"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
K2
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 25 Dec 2011
Posts: 22675

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2018 11:52 am    Post subject:

kikanga wrote:
Dow down another 700 points. Where is adkindo? He was posting in here when the opposite was happening.

The market is tanking.


That was from yesterday, the markets are closed today for the national day of mourning.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aussiesuede
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 10039

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2018 11:53 am    Post subject:

splashmtn wrote:
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez promises to pay her interns $15 an hour or more, after slamming unpaid internships in Congress

https://www.businessinsider.com/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-pay-interns-15-an-hour-2018-12
Quote:
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has promised to pay her congressional interns at least $15 an hour.

Her pledge comes days after she slammed her future colleagues in both parties for employing unpaid interns and for not paying staffers a "living wage."

"Very few members of Congress actually pay their interns. We will be one of them," she said Tuesday.

A 2017 report found that just 8% of Republicans and 3.6% of Democrats in the House pay their interns
.


As I recall, Bill Clinton was quite happy that interns were not paid since the Monica Lewinsky dress adornment visits could have become "complicated" if she were indeed on the payroll.
_________________
I'm On point, On task, On message, and Off drugs. A Streetwise Smart Bomb, Out of rehab and In denial. Over the Top, On the edge, Under the Radar, and In Control. Behind the 8 ball, Ahead of the Curve and I've got a Love Child who sends me Hate mail.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ChefLinda
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 20 Sep 2006
Posts: 15929
Location: Boston

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2018 12:06 pm    Post subject:

DaMuleRules wrote:
LarryCoon wrote:
DaMuleRules wrote:
And this is why I feel it is critical to emphasize candidates who are highly capable, knowledgable and experienced in the political circle and support their run - as opposed to promoting novelty candidates such as the Avenattis and Oprahs (not to imply I believe they are on equal footing in regards to merit).


I have to admit I'm internally conflicted a little bit.

For example, while I'm 100% pro-choice, I hate that the issue is such a rallying point for the right -- because it means that the issue will get more people off their couches to vote for a candidate so long as he/she supports their sacred cow.

Likewise, the previous two Dem candidates have gotten the racists and misogynists to crawl out of the woodwork and vote for a horrible candidate -- because they see him as sharing their worldview, and validating their opinions.

My internal conflict is that on one hand, I absolutely want the best candidate to show up, and if that candidate represents ethnic and/or gender diversity, I'd consider that a victory -- and I'd welcome the good fight it'd take to achieve that victory. On the other hand, I've seen the consequences when the wrong people can be coaxed out of the woodwork, and the consequences from this can be generational (see Trump's two SCOTUS appointments). So part of me wants the next Dem candidate to be as non-controversial as possible. I hate that the situation makes me feel that way, but part of me DOES feel that way.


Totally understandable. Hopefully a highly capable and "appropriate" (for lack of a better word) candidate will arise that brings the accomplishment and credibility we need with a minimum of controversy. Though given the current political climate, I fear controversy is going to be unavoidable to some degree.


I think the lesson of the mid-terms is to expand the base, register new voters, give young people, women, people of color and college-educated whites a candidate that can speak to them and their issues. And don't try to pander to the right-wing wackos/racists/bigots/misogynists or even worry about them. They can be outvoted because there are more of "us" than "them." When a progressive candidate tries to tame their message so as not to offend these bigots, they also simultaneously stop exciting their own base. I think we just have to go for what we believe in and let the chips fall where they may. I think ribeye posted a whole bunch of surveys about where Americans stand on various issues. When you don't attach a party label, most people in this country actually like progressive policies. So in the mid-terms, candidates focused on policy without attaching labels. It's harder to do in a presidential election, but the Democrats have to figure out a high-tech way of getting their message directly to the voters (the way the (bleep) Russians did) because Democrats can't count on the mainstream media to cover appropriately.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Wilt
LG Contributor
LG Contributor


Joined: 29 Dec 2002
Posts: 9746

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2018 12:20 pm    Post subject:

The problem with the argument that we should focus on non-controversial candidates is that one of those controversial candidates had two comfortable victories in the EC and in the popular vote, and the other controversial candidate won the popular vote and lost the EC in three states with a margin that could fit in a football stadium, while having to deal with foreign interference and domestic interference by the FBI director.

2016 was a weird election for many reasons, and we shouldn't just declare that everything we did that year as something we should never do again. Had that election been held 100 times, she would have won 75 of them. Trump needed a perfect night and he got one and he still barely won. It's very unlikely that he'll have perfect nights in 2016 and 2020.

The one advantage we have, as CL said, even with a flawed electoral system, is that there are more of us than them in the states that we need to win the presidency, even if the racists and xenophobes come out to vote. The results in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania a few weeks ago prove that. If we show up, we win. Hopefully what happened in 2016 will result in people behaving more reasonably, which is to show up, regardless what candidate we have. The worst Democratic candidate is better than the best GOP candidate.
_________________
¡Hala Madrid!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
PHILosophize
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 05 Nov 2012
Posts: 8144

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2018 12:32 pm    Post subject:

K2 wrote:
kikanga wrote:
Dow down another 700 points. Where is adkindo? He was posting in here when the opposite was happening.

The market is tanking.


That was from yesterday, the markets are closed today for the national day of mourning.


mourning how badly the market is doing?
_________________
one dog goes that way the other dog goes the other way
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
splashmtn
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 30 Aug 2016
Posts: 3295

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2018 1:35 pm    Post subject:

Wilt wrote:
The problem with the argument that we should focus on non-controversial candidates is that one of those controversial candidates had two comfortable victories in the EC and in the popular vote, and the other controversial candidate won the popular vote and lost the EC in three states with a margin that could fit in a football stadium, while having to deal with foreign interference and domestic interference by the FBI director.

2016 was a weird election for many reasons, and we shouldn't just declare that everything we did that year as something we should never do again. Had that election been held 100 times, she would have won 75 of them. Trump needed a perfect night and he got one and he still barely won. It's very unlikely that he'll have perfect nights in 2016 and 2020.

The one advantage we have, as CL said, even with a flawed electoral system, is that there are more of us than them in the states that we need to win the presidency, even if the racists and xenophobes come out to vote. The results in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania a few weeks ago prove that. If we show up, we win. Hopefully what happened in 2016 will result in people behaving more reasonably, which is to show up, regardless what candidate we have. The worst Democratic candidate is better than the best GOP candidate.
but that bold is the problem. we have to stop thinking like this. This breeds mediocre candidates. this breeds the "lesser of two evils" type of candidates. sorry, i dont just want someone that aint as bad as the idiot we have now. anyone of you on LG could pull that off with your eyes closed. The point is, I would like to see and have a very good to great choice. lets not even discuss the but what if... Nope. Give me a great choice. and if you can't find one....do more homework and research until you can. They are out there. Unlike DMR and others may want. that great candidate may not have a lot of experience. perhaps we dont have any great candidates that have been heavily involved in politics for a long while. maybe they are too jaded. or semi corrupted. who knows. i say leave no stone unturned when searching for that good to great candidate. Give the people someone to want to vote for. not just an "at least it aint as bad as ...." vote. and thats just the white house. we need this to happen multiple times over in different branches of the Fed as well as at the state and local levels. These shady people gotta go.

what they are doing in wisconsin after losing is unamerican and they to me deserve to be kicked out the country for it. Thats some 3rd world shady nonsense type of stuff they are pulling. The shady voting fraud they pulled in NC with them picking up people's ballots and possibly disposing of them.

anyone trying to stop people from voting needs to get booted out of public office. and if you're caught doing it. you need to be put on time out outside the country for 10 years.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Wilt
LG Contributor
LG Contributor


Joined: 29 Dec 2002
Posts: 9746

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2018 1:55 pm    Post subject:

Anyone who considered Hillary "the lesser of two evils" is an idiot.
_________________
¡Hala Madrid!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
VicXLakers
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 08 Feb 2006
Posts: 8880

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2018 2:06 pm    Post subject:

I think that right now the worst thing you could be called is a Republican
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
PHILosophize
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 05 Nov 2012
Posts: 8144

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2018 2:23 pm    Post subject:

Wilt wrote:
Anyone who considered Hillary "the lesser of two evils" is an idiot.


what should she have been considered instead
_________________
one dog goes that way the other dog goes the other way
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ribeye
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 10 Nov 2001
Posts: 8425

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2018 2:29 pm    Post subject:

PHILosophize wrote:
Wilt wrote:
Anyone who considered Hillary "the lesser of two evils" is an idiot.


what should she have been considered instead


The better of the two candidates--or better said, the WAY F'ing Better!
_________________
For the adults in the room only
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Huey Lewis & The News
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 18 Dec 2015
Posts: 3958
Location: So what's the uh...topic of discussion?

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2018 2:39 pm    Post subject:

PHILosophize wrote:
Wilt wrote:
Anyone who considered Hillary "the lesser of two evils" is an idiot.


what should she have been considered instead


president
_________________
"All wars are civil wars, because all men are brothers."
http://forums.lakersground.net/profile.php?mode=viewprofile&u=13018
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
splashmtn
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 30 Aug 2016
Posts: 3295

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2018 3:03 pm    Post subject:

Wilt wrote:
Anyone who considered Hillary "the lesser of two evils" is an idiot.
no not at all. to say such a thing means she has 100% great policies that are championed by every group of people out there. to some group or sub groups she may be considered the lesser of two evils. Just because thats not the case to YOU. Doesn't mean its not the case to someone else. And I'm not talking about people worrying about the emails. The point was simple. Lets stop with the idea "lets just vote dem" sure in reality thats probably whats going to happen if push comes to shove. but before we get to that point, lets make darn sure the Dem choice is by far a Good to GREAT candidate.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
splashmtn
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 30 Aug 2016
Posts: 3295

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2018 3:09 pm    Post subject:

you guys need to listen to this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Og2s_4pTWVw

i know some where in here i posted something and so did someone else. This is just plain evil. This is the kind of stuff that can have a sane person attempt to do something crazy to one of these politicians. You should never keep messing with people like this. Eventually someone will crack and all hell can break lose from both sides. Which is something non of us want because that would mean we are no different than some of these countries with horrible political systems. where you have people that like one side literally trying to harm the person representing the other side and vice versa. This is how that kind of stuff happens when you have a particular side trying to change the rules even after the people have voted you out.

even if you take the crazy out. These people in Wisconsin need to be pulling up to These politicians neighborhoods and just camping out and having a Foot like tail gate every single night. let the police come every...single...night to disperse the crowd. make them super uncomfortable. start following them when they go out with their spouses and their children. just shadowing them everywhere protesting loudly.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
VicXLakers
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 08 Feb 2006
Posts: 8880

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2018 3:19 pm    Post subject:

^ some seem to think it's both sides of the aisle instead of the GOP being the problem
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
kikanga
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 15 Sep 2012
Posts: 17955
Location: La La Land

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2018 3:26 pm    Post subject:

https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/05/politics/george-hw-bush-funeral-photo/index.html
_________________
Turn your losses into lessons. - Mike "The Situation"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Freddie Buckets
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 08 Oct 2007
Posts: 8387

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2018 3:38 pm    Post subject:

Wilt wrote:
Anyone who considered Hillary "the lesser of two evils" is an idiot.


I've never understood why Hillary had the stigma of being corrupt but plenty of people I talked to just didn't like her for whatever reason.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LarryCoon
Site Staff
Site Staff


Joined: 11 Aug 2002
Posts: 10186

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2018 3:54 pm    Post subject:

Freddie Buckets wrote:
Wilt wrote:
Anyone who considered Hillary "the lesser of two evils" is an idiot.


I've never understood why Hillary had the stigma of being corrupt but plenty of people I talked to just didn't like her for whatever reason.


Well....

* She ran a pedophile ring out of a pizza joint
* She's a satan worshiper
* Benghazi
* Her charity is a money laundering operation
* Benghazi
* She ran her entire operation through a secret, private email server
* The email server leaked classified information to our enemies
* When the emails were subpoenaed, she bleached them, eliminating 30,000 of them
* Benghazi
* She approved a shady uranium deal
* Benghazi

....at least, that's what I gather.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> Off Topic All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 1280, 1281, 1282 ... 1287, 1288, 1289  Next
Page 1281 of 1289
Jump to:  

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum






Graphics by uberzev
© 1995-2018 LakersGround.net. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.
LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.
We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.


Powered by phpBB