When you can't beat them, lie! All one has to do is a basic Google search to verify your claims. Well they also need to be able to discern bullshit from reality. I guess that's the part you have trouble with.
Everything I stated is true.
Honestly, I couldn't here what you were saying over the drama of you angrily tossing your mushed carrots across the room.
Everything I stated is true.
Well good for me. At least I know how to spell hear.
Then what you need to do is get someone to run for office that believes the same thing, back them and get them elected. Hell, since you know what is true why don't you get out there, proclaim the truth, build a massive following while running for President on that truth, win in a record-breaking landslide, then rake in the universal worship and acclaim that you so richly deserve?
Seems to be working for Trump, amirite?
I have no idea what you are raving about.
Everything I stated is true.
His assumption also assumes that Trump had any strategy to leak. They could possibly get hacked info from the RNC, but it would be trying to keep Trump out, not in. And anyway, most of the Republican establishment are saying those things in public. Besides, the US media is already functioning as the Democrats' October surprise.I agree that they're timing the leaks to maximize damage to the Clinton campaign. It is very clear that Assange does not like Clinton. However, from the context of my conversation with Balt, I was referring to Republican/Trump-related dirt that Wikileaks is refusing to release.
This assumption would seem to suggest that Russia attempted to or successfully hacked the RNC as well, which would fly in the face of the current mantra that Russia started all of this for the primary purpose of making Clinton look bad and Trump look good.
You're also assuming that Trump's empire has the same visibility and reach that the DNC does, which I think is a pretty terrible assumption considering that Trump keeps a very tight lid on his operations and image, and does not have the same obligation to keep potentially-damning documentation on hand that a public official might.
That's the tragedy of a two-party system: It matters not how much your candidate sucks if the other party's candidate sucks more.Lots of tribal democrats in this thread. I don't think Wikileaks are pro-Trump. They're likely more pro-Sanders. They just hate the establishment. If it had been Sanders vs Bush, they'd likely focused on Bush.
This entire thread is a hilarious bucket of Clintonite tears. Your candidate sucks, just deal with it. (And BTW Trump is a disaster). It can't be fun having to choose between two god-awful candidates but that is America 2016.
Its about as true as you being the dumbest poster on this forum!
Nah, I can think of at least two posters who are an order of magnitude dumber.I think you mean the smartest poster; what you said is actually more or less true.
Nah, I can think of at least two posters who are an order of magnitude dumber.
It seems implied that Clinton is better for America than Trump. How so? Wealth inequality under democrat policies is already at critical levels. Democrats in practice are figuratively throwing gifts at the poor to placate them while the rich siphon off an every growing slice of wealth at nearly no risk. The fate of the country is actually hanging in the balance IMO.
And I have no illusions about the economy likely collapsing under trump, but the bubbles/misallocation of wealth needs to stop or else the whole thing goes down.
There are two outcomes... stop stimulating the economy and let what happens just happen and get it over with, or keep cutting rates and end up with some kind of bizarre Japanese economy where the birth rate is low because no one can afford a family.
I feel like if Japan goes under/hits full monetezation it would serve as a clear warning to the world what happens when you ignore your debt problems for too long
What wealth inequality? The only thing to argue is how steep the upward slope goes.I suggest you get some updated stats because you are starting to sound like a moron!
It seems implied that Clinton is better for America than Trump. How so? Wealth inequality under democrat policies is already at critical levels. Democrats in practice are figuratively throwing gifts at the poor to placate them while the rich siphon off an every growing slice of wealth at nearly no risk. The fate of the country is actually hanging in the balance IMO.
And I have no illusions about the economy likely collapsing under trump, but the bubbles/misallocation of wealth needs to stop or else the whole thing goes down.
There are two outcomes... stop stimulating the economy and let what happens just happen and get it over with, or keep cutting rates and end up with some kind of bizarre Japanese economy where the birth rate is low because no one can afford a family.
I feel like if Japan goes under/hits full monetezation it would serve as a clear warning to the world what happens when you ignore your debt problems for too long
It seems implied that Clinton is better for America than Trump. How so? Wealth inequality under democrat policies is already at critical levels. Democrats in practice are figuratively throwing gifts at the poor to placate them while the rich siphon off an every growing slice of wealth at nearly no risk. The fate of the country is actually hanging in the balance IMO.
And I have no illusions about the economy likely collapsing under trump, but the bubbles/misallocation of wealth needs to stop or else the whole thing goes down.
There are two outcomes... stop stimulating the economy and let what happens just happen and get it over with, or keep cutting rates and end up with some kind of bizarre Japanese economy where the birth rate is low because no one can afford a family.
I feel like if Japan goes under/hits full monetezation it would serve as a clear warning to the world what happens when you ignore your debt problems for too long
fucken baby grammar nazis! there the worst!
Lots of tribal democrats in this thread. I don't think Wikileaks are pro-Trump. They're likely more pro-Sanders. They just hate the establishment. If it had been Sanders vs Bush, they'd likely focused on Bush.
This entire thread is a hilarious bucket of Clintonite tears. Your candidate sucks, just deal with it. (And BTW Trump is a disaster). It can't be fun having to choose between two god-awful candidates but that is America 2016.
That's not unexpected...
Its about as true as you being the dumbest poster on this forum!
I believe he has been dropped on his head a few too many times