Clinton promises steady hand in dangerous world

[MajarTheLion]

We can allow more of the privilege people to run President from the same family but can't allow retired Lt. Gen. Micheal Flynn become Secretary of defense for 8 years after retirement from the military who's experience clearly outweighs Clinton empty time in Washington. But OBAMA made her Secretary of State? ISIL will vote for her in NOV. I'm sure.

And I'm pretty sure Huma Abedin has the M****m Brotherhood vote locked down.

[slipperylobster]

Sorry Hillary...you will never get that chance.

taken from http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/

Edited July 29, 2016 by metisdead
Corrected the link.

[MajarTheLion]

New poll.jpg

Sorry Hillary...you will never get that chance.

Imagine that. Trump went from having a 1% chance of winning the primary to a better than even chance of winning the general election. And all this with the establishment goons declaring his candidacy DOA over and over and over again along the way.

I believe the American people are paying a little attention. When you see a convention that has Soviet flags but no US flags, and the mother of a criminal killed by a cop after robbing a store and trying to take the cop's gun, I see a party that is out of touch with how Main Street Americans think.

[Chicog]

I know you were all so enthralled with her speech, especially compared to that nihilistic, depressing crap that Trump spewed out, that you'll want a chance to watch it again.

You're welcome.

[Diplomatico]

New poll.jpg

Sorry Hillary...you will never get that chance.

taken from http://fivethirtyeight.com/

That graphic does NOT portray the numbers posted on the fivethirtyeight.com website (updated as of 17 hours ago).

I don't like Clinton (or Trump, really) but let's not post verifiably false information, huh? The graphic on the website shows Clinton leading with a 53.7% probability of winning vs. 46.3% for Trump.....and looking at the historical numbers provided by the website itself, Trump has never led by as much as your graphic depicts.

(If you are habitually doctoring information and then attributing it to legitimate websites, I suspect that may be a legal issue, btw.)

Edited July 29, 2016 by Diplomatico

[Chicog]

And two fingers up to draft-dodging Trump for his spiteful anti-Muslim rhetoric.

Edited July 29, 2016 by Chicog

[gyrosman]

For those who are interested , pull up Hillary's voting record as a Senator in NY. Boy, she calls Trump a LIAR, what mirror does she look into. Check it out.

[gyrosman]

For those who are interested , pull up Hillary's voting record as a Senator in NY. Boy, she calls Trump a LIAR, what mirror does she look into. Check it out.

[slipperylobster]

I know you were all so enthralled with her speech, especially compared to that nihilistic, depressing crap that Trump spewed out, that you'll want a chance to watch it again.

You're welcome.

does this come with sleeping pills and ear plugs....?

might actually get through the first minute of this rubbish.

[Jingthing]

New poll.jpg

Sorry Hillary...you will never get that chance.

taken from http://fivethirtyeight.com/

Why do you post such a blatant lie? Wow.

The most current numbers on that site show Clinton 53.7 chance and the dangerous demagogue trump at 46.3

[Jingthing]

For those who are interested , pull up Hillary's voting record as a Senator in NY. Boy, she calls Trump a LIAR, what mirror does she look into. Check it out.

How convenient that trump doesn't have any voting record and happily probably never will.

The dangerous demagogue trump changes the bloviating B.S. coming out of his orange face almost daily. Record? What he worry?

[JetsetBkk]

This must be the most miserable sounding and looking 42 seconds in the history of "I'm so happy . . ." The woman literally snarls and her decrepit old husband stands there slack jawed looking like he already has one foot in the grave.

I ran out of sick-bags.

Chelsea's husband: like father, like son?

The father:

"In 2002, Edward Mezvinsky pleaded guilty to 31 counts of felony bank fraud after being accused of stealing more than $10 million from unsuspecting investors, including $309,000 from his 86-year-old mother-in-law"

http://heavy.com/news/2016/07/edward-mezvinsky-marjorie-margolies-marc-father-mother-parents-chelsea-clinton-bill-hillary-fraud-family-convention-democratic-in-laws/

The son:

"Chelsea Clinton's hedge fund boss husband has refused to apologize to investors - despite losing nearly $25 million in a calamitous gamble on the Greek economy."

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3587429/Chelsea-Clinton-s-contemptuous-husband-Marc-Mezvinsky-say-investors-despite-losing-90-percent-millions-calamitous-gamble-Greek-economy.html

They would fit right in with Hillary and Bill.

Edited July 29, 2016 by JetsetBkk

[marcusd]

"The energy around Hillary is not much."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/politics/these-vendors-at-the-democratic-convention-dont-see-much-enthusiasm-for-clinton/2016/07/28/feacaa96-54db-11e6-b652-315ae5d4d4dd_video.html

Are you one of those USA peoplew who voted Gorge W who casued the issues and problems the world is still trying to fix today or are you one of those who abstains from voting and then complains?

[Dumbastheycome]

This must be the most miserable sounding and looking 42 seconds in the history of "I'm so happy . . ." The woman literally snarls and her decrepit old husband stands there slack jawed looking like he already has one foot in the grave.

I see.

How mean spirited.

Anyway, if good old Bill happens to die while Hillary Clinton is president, perhaps she can borrow from trump's playbook and get a mail order boy toy husband from Eastern Europe! Or perhaps come out as lesbian and marry Tiffany Trump! Historic changes coming!

[Rod Gold]

Correct me if I am wrong, but is this site collecting one's likes and dislikes to build a profile? If so, to what end?

[Chicog]

Like she has the balls to make a decision about nation security. Check the photo attached, OMG hey she's safe with secret service for life, what about the rest of us who don't live with a given silver spoon in her mouth. At least Trump did it on his own.

No he didn't, he got a million dollar loan from his father, a healthy inheritance and further bailouts when his casinos were going down the toilet.

If you want to see how well he's done, look at his tax records.

Oh.

Edited July 29, 2016 by Chicog

[boomerangutang]

She's a puppet and there are so many people with their hands on the strings that her face is is all bent out of shape.

Id rather see a straight shooter like Mr Trump who won't be out to antagonise russia and treat everything they do with suspicionlike hillary and her handlers do.

thaksin similar to trump? never heard anyone say that.

Then you haven't been reading many threads on this topic, because I've mentioned the similarities several times.

Here are some of the ways Thaksin is very similar to Trump:

>>> both worship money as the most important thing, though both go through motions to give the appearance they're religious.

>>> both are rich, and come from rich families. For them, there's no such thing as too much money.

>>> both are enamored by themselves and like to have people around them kowtowing and pledging their undying support.

>>> both are adept at hiding money trails.

>>> both think their individual ideas are the best ideas, and need little input from others.

>>> both are quick to blame, to call names, to make excuses.

>>> both see themselves as without flaws - never having made mistakes.

>>> both are experts at gaining popularity with big promises.

[Jingthing]

When I first starting coming to Thailand Thaksin was coming to power. I was not a fan but it's their country. I asked a Thaksin supporter what's the appeal? The answer ... he's so massively rich that he can't be corrupted. That's a comment you often get from trump supporters. First of all, trump isn't nearly as rich as he lies about and secondly there is no such thing as being so rich you can't be corrupted. Duh! But I'm not suggesting they're the same, just similarities.

Another point, back then yes it was obvious that Thailand was in need of some change. (Won't comment on today ... I don't comment on current Thai politics.) But that begs the question was Thaksin the actual specific human being Thaksin a good change agent for the change that was needed? Americans, please ask the same thing about trump. The man that invites Russia to spy on his own country and tweeted he wants to "PUNCH" some speakers from the democratic convention. Literally, he said that, he wants to PUNCH them. About as presidential as Mussolini, if you like that kind of thing.

Edited July 29, 2016 by Jingthing

[iReason]

Donald Trump now hates Michael Bloomberg because Bloomberg was mean to him

"One of the more effective speeches during the Democratic convention came from former New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg."

"In many ways, Bloomberg is what Donald Trump wants to be: a very rich guy who runs a media company and who converted that wealth into political power."

"Of all of the rich New Yorkers involved in the 2016 campaign, Bloomberg is the richest, worth some $40 billion,

four times what Trump says he's worth and 13 times what Bloomberg (the media company) estimates Trump is actually worth."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/07/29/donald-trump-now-hates-michael-bloomberg-because-bloomberg-was-mean-to-him/

Donald Trump adorns Michael Bloomberg with Marco Rubio's former nickname in irate tweetstorm

"Donald Trump lashed out Friday morning on Twitter against multiple targets, criticizing Hillary Clinton,

several Democratic National Convention speakers, and media coverage of her speech accepting the Democratic nomination the night before."

"In a series of tweets, Trump took aim at "Little" Michael Bloomberg, the former mayor of New York City who Trump said "knows nothing" about him."

http://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trump-michael-bloomberg-hillary-clinton-speech-dnc-2016-7

Lovin' it.

The man child, the equivalent of a clueless teenage "Tweeter", the Bloviator, losing it. ( Again )

In public.

And, oops:

Edited July 29, 2016 by iReason

[arjunadawn]

Translation: Same S#6t different Day. Status quo, the same.

"Steady hand" is an appeal for a Medvedev like third term of Obama. Besides being a horrible person (numerous accounts offered by secret service and other personnel in books and interview that remarkably corroborate other commentaries on her raging, unbalanced nature), Clinton is also an incompetent manager (Libya, abusing DoD imperatives, emails, personal servers, servers compromised, lying to the mothers of slain US personnel, lying to the world, Benghazi, refusing to put Boko Haram on State terrorist list, ad infinitum).

Hillary has personally made much of the world the "dangerous" place she now asserts her "steady hand" would mitigate. From funding ISIS with hundreds of Toyota Hilluxes fitting with reinforced weapons mounts to the ubiquitous State Department Glock pistols outfitting IS, to using cut-outs to bypass international arms shipments, Clinton has personally made the world highly volatile.* Oh, and her ridiculous "re set" with Russia. There are fewer examples of a person being so clearly compromised. She could not under any circumstances ever pass a standard background check for a Secret clearance issues by the US State department. I have had numerous; she could not pass the SF86. There is no way she would be approved were she not already in the loop.

There is no reason to even open the Clinton Foundation scandals. Breathtaking. "Dangerous." There are fewer examples of the utter moral depravity of this woman then her unguarded response to Qaddafi's death, the culmination of her aggressive push for war against DOD recommendations.

Every single thing Hersch has written on the subject of Libya and ISIS has proven correct thus far.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-05-01/seymour-hersh-says-hillary-approved-sending-libyas-sarin-syrian-rebels

http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/breaking-smoking-gun-docs-show-hillary-clinton-knew-benghazi-along-whoa/

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/oct/20/hillary-clinton-state-department-approved-us-weapo/

*Even the state department were unable to get long guns into theater because they were governed by another mechanism; so, only AKs. But, glock pistols could be brought in. State brought them in in the tens of thousands they are now standard sidearms of DAESH.

[Jingthing]

Seize this moment!

[MajarTheLion]

That graphic does NOT portray the numbers posted on the fivethirtyeight.com website (updated as of 17 hours ago).

I don't like Clinton (or Trump, really) but let's not post verifiably false information, huh? The graphic on the website shows Clinton leading with a 53.7% probability of winning vs. 46.3% for Trump.....and looking at the historical numbers provided by the website itself, Trump has never led by as much as your graphic depicts.

(If you are habitually doctoring information and then attributing it to legitimate websites, I suspect that may be a legal issue, btw.)

So all these news outlets are lying?

https://us.search.yahoo.com/yhs/search?hspart=arh&hsimp=yhs-001&type=xy_6b93ed9c&param1=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%3D%3D&param2=NqFdMWN8Nat9&p=fivethirtyeight.com+trump+has+57.5%25+chance+of+winning

[Ulysses G.]

That graphic does NOT portray the numbers posted on the fivethirtyeight.com website (updated as of 17 hours ago).

I don't like Clinton (or Trump, really) but let's not post verifiably false information, huh? The graphic on the website shows Clinton leading with a 53.7% probability of winning vs. 46.3% for Trump.....and looking at the historical numbers provided by the website itself, Trump has never led by as much as your graphic depicts.

(If you are habitually doctoring information and then attributing it to legitimate websites, I suspect that may be a legal issue, btw.)

So all these news outlets are lying?

https://us.search.yahoo.com/yhs/search?hspart=arh&hsimp=yhs-001&type=xy_6b93ed9c&param1=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%3D%3D&param2=NqFdMWN8Nat9&p=fivethirtyeight.com+trump+has+57.5%+chance+of+winning

Silver raised eyebrows Friday on Twitter when he pointed out "how plausible it is that Trump could become president."

Don't think people are really grasping how plausible it is that Trump could become president. It's a close election right now.

— Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) July 23, 2016

[NovaBlue05]

she is using bills popularity to get herself elected in much the same way yingluck used her brothers. bill was a popular guy despite his scallay-wag behavior.

Total rubbish.

Hillary Clinton is massively qualified.

She had been a U.S. senator from a major state for several years and of course one term as Secretary of State.

Yingluck came in with no political experience whatsoever, indeed very limited relevant work experience either.

Yingluck's rise was a typical third world type thing where women are sometimes used as stand ins or replacements for powerful male leaders.

This is nothing like the situation with Hillary Clinton.

It may be tempting to make simple minded equivalencies to Thailand, but in this case it doesn't even begin to wash.

Also, this is a world news topic. There is no need to relate it to Thailand at all and I judge your attempt to do so as a total fail.

Of course I will admit that some people have seen some similarities between Thaksin and trump, but I consider that way too unfairly insulting to Thaksin.

Seriously JT...Your adoration of all things Hillary is remarkable to say the least.

Do you think there's still room on Rushmore to carve her head in?

[williamgeorgeallen]

Trump has never been elected to anything and likely never will be. Sure Hillary benefitted from name recognition and connections to win her first senate race. But after that it was up to her whether voters rejected her or not. Obama likely picked her to keep his enemies close but they appear to have bonded. It's sexist and offensive to suggest Hillary isn't qualified to be president and is only nearly there from connections. She's massively qualified.

dont think anyone said hillary should not be president because she is female. she should not be president because she is a crook.

[keemapoot]

I love Bill Maher's quip, which played off of Hilary's campaign slogan and the t-shirts we have all seen:

On HBO, Maher summed up two weeks of TV spectacle by riffing off Clinton’s “I’m With Her” slogan.

“We have either ‘I’m with her,’” he said, “or ‘I’m with stupid. That’s the election in a nutshell.”

[NovaBlue05]

I love Bill Maher's quip, which played off of Hilary's campaign slogan and the t-shirts we have all seen:

On HBO, Maher summed up two weeks of TV spectacle by riffing off Clinton’s “I’m With Her” slogan.

“We have either ‘I’m with her,’” he said, “or ‘I’m with stupid. That’s the election in a nutshell.”

Well...Isn't Bill Maher the clever little shlt......

[Diplomatico]

That graphic does NOT portray the numbers posted on the fivethirtyeight.com website (updated as of 17 hours ago).

I don't like Clinton (or Trump, really) but let's not post verifiably false information, huh? The graphic on the website shows Clinton leading with a 53.7% probability of winning vs. 46.3% for Trump.....and looking at the historical numbers provided by the website itself, Trump has never led by as much as your graphic depicts.

(If you are habitually doctoring information and then attributing it to legitimate websites, I suspect that may be a legal issue, btw.)

So all these news outlets are lying?

https://us.search.yahoo.com/yhs/search?hspart=arh&hsimp=yhs-001&type=xy_6b93ed9c&param1=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%3D%3D&param2=NqFdMWN8Nat9&p=fivethirtyeight.com+trump+has+57.5%25+chance+of+winning

You should have at least checked those links before using them as "proof". Many of them (including #2 - fivethirtyeight.com) don't even mention what you're trying to prove.

So those "news outlets" (and I use the term loosely since some of them are just internet discussion boards, not news outlets) aren't lying....they just don't substantiate the post to which I responded.

What Silver postulated was that - if the election had been held on the Monday after the RNC - on that day, Trump would have had a 57.5% chance of winning. It wasn't based upon a "new poll" which is what the poster to whom I responded represented the information as being.

We all know the election wasn't held that day and there are no polls - current or otherwise - that show/have shown Trump ahead by that margin.

[Diplomatico]

I love Bill Maher's quip, which played off of Hilary's campaign slogan and the t-shirts we have all seen:

On HBO, Maher summed up two weeks of TV spectacle by riffing off Clinton’s “I’m With Her” slogan.

“We have either ‘I’m with her,’” he said, “or ‘I’m with stupid. That’s the election in a nutshell.”

Well...Isn't Bill Maher the clever little shlt......

I hate Maher's political views but I will admit that he's finally found his niche as a Democratic political comedian (much like Jon Steward did). I recall back in the day watching Maher trying to do stand-up and, other than a couple of minor bits, he really wasn't very funny.

Edit to add: I suspect Maher can afford to hire better joke writers these days.

Edited July 29, 2016 by Diplomatico

[williamgeorgeallen]

New poll.jpg

Sorry Hillary...you will never get that chance.

taken from http://fivethirtyeight.com/

That graphic does NOT portray the numbers posted on the fivethirtyeight.com website (updated as of 17 hours ago).

I don't like Clinton (or Trump, really) but let's not post verifiably false information, huh? The graphic on the website shows Clinton leading with a 53.7% probability of winning vs. 46.3% for Trump.....and looking at the historical numbers provided by the website itself, Trump has never led by as much as your graphic depicts.

(If you are habitually doctoring information and then attributing it to legitimate websites, I suspect that may be a legal issue, btw.)

legal issue. yes, police will come knocking any minute to lock you up for 10 years, or collect a 500thb fine.