American Presidential candidates GoP/Dems
Discussion
Some Gump said:
It's your statement. Back it up or admit you're spouting unsubstantiated / fabricated s
t.
Your claim "practically admitted". Your proof? A vague mention that someone else mentioned a video you've not linked that she may or may not have seen that she didn't categorically deny on a clip of a debate you can't provide a link to?
fk me, you should have joined the Oxford Union. They'd be in awe.
are you crazy or what?! Several officials (that she knew very well) resigned because of that video BEFORE debate and she didn't know about that?! What are the odds?t. Your claim "practically admitted". Your proof? A vague mention that someone else mentioned a video you've not linked that she may or may not have seen that she didn't categorically deny on a clip of a debate you can't provide a link to?
f
k me, you should have joined the Oxford Union. They'd be in awe.I feel we're going round in circles.
You have made a claim. You can't back it up with anything but insinuation.
You lose.
This is a pity, because Clinton is slimy as fk, and the whole US politics situation is a sad, sad state of affairs. I'd actually quite like you to pony up something, anything other than plebby mud slinging with no evidence whatsoever. It's your debate technique (or complete lack of it) I'm taking issue with, not the content.
You have made a claim. You can't back it up with anything but insinuation.
You lose.
This is a pity, because Clinton is slimy as f
k, and the whole US politics situation is a sad, sad state of affairs. I'd actually quite like you to pony up something, anything other than plebby mud slinging with no evidence whatsoever. It's your debate technique (or complete lack of it) I'm taking issue with, not the content.Pesty said:
Ok you don't like wiki links this look kosher ?
http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/2014/04/04/...
6billion goes missing trump brought it up at the last debate Hillary who is an habitual liar said that had been debunked.
Could be a fake site don't know even if it's real will any Hillary supporters care?
https://oig.state.gov/system/files/224580.pdf
If the movie Men in Black thought me anything is that 6 billion is exactly how much area51 cost to run http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/2014/04/04/...
6billion goes missing trump brought it up at the last debate Hillary who is an habitual liar said that had been debunked.
Could be a fake site don't know even if it's real will any Hillary supporters care?
https://oig.state.gov/system/files/224580.pdf
Edited by Pesty on Thursday 20th October 23:12
AreOut said:
Where in that 1h 36 of footage is the bit you're referring to?It's hilarious how some posters here who have no skin in the game get so upset in support of Trump, a candidate who, here in America, is supported by not a single serious person. As goes this thread goes the election, foaming morons lapping up Trump's lies on one side,the rest of us on the other. And I'm not just talking about democrats, just about every credible republican, businessman, economist and thinking human being knows that Trump would have been the worst possible person ever elected and a danger to us and to the whole world. But that doesn't stop PHers from Wolverhampton to the Scottish Highlands getting incandescent with rage in support of a cartoonish demagogue that to most Americans is a figure of derision or disgust. Even many of those who will vote for him would prefer almost any other republican to be the candidate, even Mike Pence.
I can understand 5ohpreston, he's bonkers of course but at least he lives here. I don't agree with Jimbeaux on much but at least he understands the fundamentals and is consistent in his beliefs. Some of the UK posters who have joined this thread in recent months are clearly in need of an intervention from mental health professionals as they zealously support Trump and swallow whole every lie and invention about his opponent. I'm tempted to tell some of them to get a life but I sense that for some like Areout this is his life, lived vicariously through a figure 4000 miles away who would undoubtedly treat him with the same contempt he has for the dribbling fools who support him here.
I can understand 5ohpreston, he's bonkers of course but at least he lives here. I don't agree with Jimbeaux on much but at least he understands the fundamentals and is consistent in his beliefs. Some of the UK posters who have joined this thread in recent months are clearly in need of an intervention from mental health professionals as they zealously support Trump and swallow whole every lie and invention about his opponent. I'm tempted to tell some of them to get a life but I sense that for some like Areout this is his life, lived vicariously through a figure 4000 miles away who would undoubtedly treat him with the same contempt he has for the dribbling fools who support him here.
unrepentant said:
It's hilarious how some posters here who have no skin in the game get so upset in support of Trump, a candidate who, here in America, is supported by not a single serious person. As goes this thread goes the election, foaming morons lapping up Trump's lies on one side,the rest of us on the other. And I'm not just talking about democrats, just about every credible republican, businessman, economist and thinking human being knows that Trump would have been the worst possible person ever elected and a danger to us and to the whole world. But that doesn't stop PHers from Wolverhampton to the Scottish Highlands getting incandescent with rage in support of a cartoonish demagogue that to most Americans is a figure of derision or disgust. Even many of those who will vote for him would prefer almost any other republican to be the candidate, even Mike Pence.
I can understand 5ohpreston, he's bonkers of course but at least he lives here. I don't agree with Jimbeaux on much but at least he understands the fundamentals and is consistent in his beliefs. Some of the UK posters who have joined this thread in recent months are clearly in need of an intervention from mental health professionals as they zealously support Trump and swallow whole every lie and invention about his opponent. I'm tempted to tell some of them to get a life but I sense that for some like Areout this is his life, lived vicariously through a figure 4000 miles away who would undoubtedly treat him with the same contempt he has for the dribbling fools who support him here.
Be careful. I remember your first post.....post brexit. We live in 'unusual' times I can understand 5ohpreston, he's bonkers of course but at least he lives here. I don't agree with Jimbeaux on much but at least he understands the fundamentals and is consistent in his beliefs. Some of the UK posters who have joined this thread in recent months are clearly in need of an intervention from mental health professionals as they zealously support Trump and swallow whole every lie and invention about his opponent. I'm tempted to tell some of them to get a life but I sense that for some like Areout this is his life, lived vicariously through a figure 4000 miles away who would undoubtedly treat him with the same contempt he has for the dribbling fools who support him here.
unrepentant said:
It's hilarious how some posters here who have no skin in the game get so upset in support of Trump, a candidate who, here in America, is supported by not a single serious person. As goes this thread goes the election, foaming morons lapping up Trump's lies on one side,the rest of us on the other. And I'm not just talking about democrats, just about every credible republican, businessman, economist and thinking human being knows that Trump would have been the worst possible person ever elected and a danger to us and to the whole world. But that doesn't stop PHers from Wolverhampton to the Scottish Highlands getting incandescent with rage in support of a cartoonish demagogue that to most Americans is a figure of derision or disgust. Even many of those who will vote for him would prefer almost any other republican to be the candidate, even Mike Pence.
I can understand 5ohpreston, he's bonkers of course but at least he lives here. I don't agree with Jimbeaux on much but at least he understands the fundamentals and is consistent in his beliefs. Some of the UK posters who have joined this thread in recent months are clearly in need of an intervention from mental health professionals as they zealously support Trump and swallow whole every lie and invention about his opponent. I'm tempted to tell some of them to get a life but I sense that for some like Areout this is his life, lived vicariously through a figure 4000 miles away who would undoubtedly treat him with the same contempt he has for the dribbling fools who support him here.
Conrad Black backed Trump solidly in QT, just. He made some salient points at first but went a lil whack-a-do as he went on.I can understand 5ohpreston, he's bonkers of course but at least he lives here. I don't agree with Jimbeaux on much but at least he understands the fundamentals and is consistent in his beliefs. Some of the UK posters who have joined this thread in recent months are clearly in need of an intervention from mental health professionals as they zealously support Trump and swallow whole every lie and invention about his opponent. I'm tempted to tell some of them to get a life but I sense that for some like Areout this is his life, lived vicariously through a figure 4000 miles away who would undoubtedly treat him with the same contempt he has for the dribbling fools who support him here.
I was watching the Debate on France 24 news channel earlier today and listened in disbelief over how people are allowed to vote in the USA.
Apparently unlike the UK system where you have to turn up at the polling station with your voting card or proof of ID in order to vote, in the USA anyone can just turn up and give their name, if it's on the list they can vote, if it's not on the list they are given temporary voting rights and can then vote as they see fit (or have been paid). I can only assume that this might kind of lead to somewhat suspect voting by a great many people who really shouldn't be allowed to vote in the first place such as illegal immigrants, etc. Also begs the question about bribed voters who could vote more than once simply by visiting more than one polling station then giving out a false name or assuming the identity of an existing voter.
Thinking further on the whole US voting system, and bearing in mind that the actual voting system is electronic rather than the far simpler and more checkable paper voting slips, I can't help but wonder if the voting figures could befiddled adjusted by the people who actually make the decisions.
Apparently unlike the UK system where you have to turn up at the polling station with your voting card or proof of ID in order to vote, in the USA anyone can just turn up and give their name, if it's on the list they can vote, if it's not on the list they are given temporary voting rights and can then vote as they see fit (or have been paid). I can only assume that this might kind of lead to somewhat suspect voting by a great many people who really shouldn't be allowed to vote in the first place such as illegal immigrants, etc. Also begs the question about bribed voters who could vote more than once simply by visiting more than one polling station then giving out a false name or assuming the identity of an existing voter.
Thinking further on the whole US voting system, and bearing in mind that the actual voting system is electronic rather than the far simpler and more checkable paper voting slips, I can't help but wonder if the voting figures could be
AreOut said:
52:05, when she responded she didn't even mention it just continued attacking him on women
That's your evidence?ahahahahaha class.
The question was "(paraphrase) Donald, what about these women that claim you molested them (after you claimed you molested women for a laugh)?"
Trump answer - Clinton Is bad, Obama, war, fight at my rally. Didn't address the question at all.
Clinton's time - Refers to the question asked by debate moderator. Ignores the mud slung by trump, because it's irrelevent to the question posed by the moderator.
That's not evidence that she's responsible for unrest at a rally. That's evidence that she can stay on topic during a debate.
Jockman said:
unrepentant said:
It's hilarious how some posters here who have no skin in the game get so upset in support of Trump, a candidate who, here in America, is supported by not a single serious person. As goes this thread goes the election, foaming morons lapping up Trump's lies on one side,the rest of us on the other. And I'm not just talking about democrats, just about every credible republican, businessman, economist and thinking human being knows that Trump would have been the worst possible person ever elected and a danger to us and to the whole world. But that doesn't stop PHers from Wolverhampton to the Scottish Highlands getting incandescent with rage in support of a cartoonish demagogue that to most Americans is a figure of derision or disgust. Even many of those who will vote for him would prefer almost any other republican to be the candidate, even Mike Pence.
I can understand 5ohpreston, he's bonkers of course but at least he lives here. I don't agree with Jimbeaux on much but at least he understands the fundamentals and is consistent in his beliefs. Some of the UK posters who have joined this thread in recent months are clearly in need of an intervention from mental health professionals as they zealously support Trump and swallow whole every lie and invention about his opponent. I'm tempted to tell some of them to get a life but I sense that for some like Areout this is his life, lived vicariously through a figure 4000 miles away who would undoubtedly treat him with the same contempt he has for the dribbling fools who support him here.
Be careful. I remember your first post.....post brexit. We live in 'unusual' times I can understand 5ohpreston, he's bonkers of course but at least he lives here. I don't agree with Jimbeaux on much but at least he understands the fundamentals and is consistent in his beliefs. Some of the UK posters who have joined this thread in recent months are clearly in need of an intervention from mental health professionals as they zealously support Trump and swallow whole every lie and invention about his opponent. I'm tempted to tell some of them to get a life but I sense that for some like Areout this is his life, lived vicariously through a figure 4000 miles away who would undoubtedly treat him with the same contempt he has for the dribbling fools who support him here.
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
rich888 said:
I was watching the Debate on France 24 news channel earlier today and listened in disbelief over how people are allowed to vote in the USA.
Apparently unlike the UK system where you have to turn up at the polling station with your voting card or proof of ID in order to vote, in the USA anyone can just turn up and give their name, if it's on the list they can vote, if it's not on the list they are given temporary voting rights and can then vote as they see fit (or have been paid). I can only assume that this might kind of lead to somewhat suspect voting by a great many people who really shouldn't be allowed to vote in the first place such as illegal immigrants, etc. Also begs the question about bribed voters who could vote more than once simply by visiting more than one polling station then giving out a false name or assuming the identity of an existing voter.
Thinking further on the whole US voting system, and bearing in mind that the actual voting system is electronic rather than the far simpler and more checkable paper voting slips, I can't help but wonder if the voting figures could befiddled adjusted by the people who actually make the decisions.
It's not quite like that - many states have different rules to each other . Some don't allow election day registration, one doesn't require registration at all (North Dakota). You have to remember that what we think of as a country of 50 states is really more like 50 little countries, each with their own rules Apparently unlike the UK system where you have to turn up at the polling station with your voting card or proof of ID in order to vote, in the USA anyone can just turn up and give their name, if it's on the list they can vote, if it's not on the list they are given temporary voting rights and can then vote as they see fit (or have been paid). I can only assume that this might kind of lead to somewhat suspect voting by a great many people who really shouldn't be allowed to vote in the first place such as illegal immigrants, etc. Also begs the question about bribed voters who could vote more than once simply by visiting more than one polling station then giving out a false name or assuming the identity of an existing voter.
Thinking further on the whole US voting system, and bearing in mind that the actual voting system is electronic rather than the far simpler and more checkable paper voting slips, I can't help but wonder if the voting figures could be
There's some info here on the differences from state to state - https://www.usa.gov/voter-registration-deadlinesAdjusting the figures would be a challenge - the whole process is open to independent monitors (anyone can apply to be one)., So there's little opportunity to switch figures.
If you were going to influence the result, the main opportunity is to do so by impersonating another person. To do that on any large scale would be a challenge - you'd need to know that person wasn't going to vote, for a start..
Interesting article on the work the Pew Trust have been doing to clean up voter databases. https://www.cnet.com/news/how-tech-eases-trump-ele... . The 1.8 million dead voters often mentioned was 4 years ago, before their initiative.
Interestingly, FactCheck say many of the dead voters in previous elections either died between mailing their postal vote and the election, or weren't actually dead! http://www.factcheck.org/2016/10/trumps-bogus-vote...
No doubt some small scale voter fraud happens, but I can't see it happening on a large enough scale to affect the result.
rich888 said:
I was watching the Debate on France 24 news channel earlier today and listened in disbelief over how people are allowed to vote in the USA.
Apparently unlike the UK system where you have to turn up at the polling station with your voting card or proof of ID in order to vote, in the USA anyone can just turn up and give their name, if it's on the list they can vote, if it's not on the list they are given temporary voting rights and can then vote as they see fit (or have been paid). I can only assume that this might kind of lead to somewhat suspect voting by a great many people who really shouldn't be allowed to vote in the first place such as illegal immigrants, etc. Also begs the question about bribed voters who could vote more than once simply by visiting more than one polling station then giving out a false name or assuming the identity of an existing voter.
Thinking further on the whole US voting system, and bearing in mind that the actual voting system is electronic rather than the far simpler and more checkable paper voting slips, I can't help but wonder if the voting figures could befiddled adjusted by the people who actually make the decisions.
In the UK you don't have to take your voting card, you just turn up and they check your name against the electoral register.Apparently unlike the UK system where you have to turn up at the polling station with your voting card or proof of ID in order to vote, in the USA anyone can just turn up and give their name, if it's on the list they can vote, if it's not on the list they are given temporary voting rights and can then vote as they see fit (or have been paid). I can only assume that this might kind of lead to somewhat suspect voting by a great many people who really shouldn't be allowed to vote in the first place such as illegal immigrants, etc. Also begs the question about bribed voters who could vote more than once simply by visiting more than one polling station then giving out a false name or assuming the identity of an existing voter.
Thinking further on the whole US voting system, and bearing in mind that the actual voting system is electronic rather than the far simpler and more checkable paper voting slips, I can't help but wonder if the voting figures could be
In the USA you have to register to vote in advance, every state has their own rules on how you do that. https://www.usa.gov/register-to-vote
Tony Starks said:
unrepentant said:
various rambling
Just because alot on here are anti Clinton, it doesn't mean they're pro Trump. You really need to take your blinkers off and actually read what people post.rich888 said:
Apparently unlike the UK system where you have to turn up at the polling station with your voting card or proof of ID in order to vote, in the USA anyone can just turn up and give their name, if it's on the list they can vote, if it's not on the list they are given temporary voting rights and can then vote as they see fit
(My bolding)Er... You don't need ID to vote in the UK. You don't even need your polling card either - the polling crd is sent as a reminder that you have registered and the details, nothing more.
When I have voted in the UK in the past, I have gone to the polling station with neither my polling card or ID and voted successfully.
Halb said:
Conrad Black backed Trump solidly in QT, just. He made some salient points at first but went a lil whack-a-do as he went on.
Even the vaguely coherent bit of Black's spiel was horsest; Trump's as complicit in the corporate subversion of democracy as the politicians. The idea he's not is laughable, he even used it as part of his stump speech during the primaries; he explicitly stated he had donated to politicians and as a result got preferential access to them.Some Gump said:
AreOut said:
52:05, when she responded she didn't even mention it just continued attacking him on women
That's your evidence?ahahahahaha class.
The question was "(paraphrase) Donald, what about these women that claim you molested them (after you claimed you molested women for a laugh)?"
Trump answer - Clinton Is bad, Obama, war, fight at my rally. Didn't address the question at all.
Clinton's time - Refers to the question asked by debate moderator. Ignores the mud slung by trump, because it's irrelevent to the question posed by the moderator.
That's not evidence that she's responsible for unrest at a rally. That's evidence that she can stay on topic during a debate.
t eating grin that kept on going for the personal. Also, if you haven't noticed they're both calling each other by first name now, it's petty and even though i think Trump should win, he does talk far too common for me, i know that resonates a lot more with common American people, but somewhere between Hillary's bullst lying but eloquent and Donalds semi-common denominator but laddish.Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff