No doubt he's got image makers and an Army of people around him
but the guy cant help himself.
You can see how the Debates are going to unfold. He's going to feel under attack from certain hosts. Then Clinton with Both being told something deeply offensive that's going to turn off floating voters.
the people who are going to vote for trump no matter what he says they wont change.
but even Fox news admits/reports unless he pulls over floating voters its over for him.
there's even Talk Ryan will unendorse him.
Trump had the perfect chance to prove so many people wrong, But just 2 weeks after
getting the official vote he' still doing the same old mistakes
No doubt he's got image makers and an Army of people around him
but the guy cant help himself. You can see how the Debates are going to unfold. He's going to feel under attack from certain hosts. Then Clinton with Both being told something deeply offensive that's going to turn off floating voters.
the people who are going to vote for trump no matter what he says they wont change.
but even Fox news admits/reports unless he pulls over floating voters its over for him.
there's even Talk Ryan will unendorse him.
Trump had the perfect chance to prove so many people wrong, But just 2 weeks after
getting the official vote he' still doing the same old mistakes
BiB - he has really upped his attacks on CNN the last few days and they host the first debate
i wouldn't be surprised if he withdraws from them blaming the biased media
BiB - he has really upped his attacks on CNN the last few days and they host the first debate
i wouldn't be surprised if he withdraws from them blaming the biased media
Of course he will. As soon as he is challenged he plays victim.
Just watching Bret Baier and even Fox despairing of him over last few days. I've not watched any Fox for weeks so surprised at their editorial. Mind you Greta will be still be his cheerleader in chief!
They weren't political rivals and he wasn't threatening the establishment.
i've never really understood quite what someone means with the phrase "threatening the establishment", can you explain what trump will do if he is elected that will achieve that ?
or do you think that giving massive tax cuts to the richest people in society is somehow a "threat to the establishment" ?
to me trump is a far bigger threat to the "ordinary american" considering his tax plan gives them next to nothing, he isn't in favour of increasing the minimum wage, in fact saying he thinks states should be able to reduce the minimum wage and he is in favour of removing workplace regulations to allow companies to be more competitive
Obama states that Trump is 'unfit' to be President.
Wow.
I mean, I agree, but I wasn't expecting Obama to come out and say such a thing.
And Clinton is fit?
You think "we came, we saw, he died" is a Presidential thing to say on the overthrow of Gaddafi? Doing childish impressions of Vladimir Putin in an interview like some third-rate Janet Brown? And that's just how she conducts herself in public, even before looking into the multiple scandals with which she and her oily husband have been associated.
Jeremy Bash, who served as chief of staff for the Pentagon and the Central Intelligence Agency, said Mrs Clinton would both escalate the fight against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, and work to get Bashar al-Assad, the Syrian president, "out of there".
"Out of there" and replaced by whom? Why do none of these 'liberal interventionists' ever have convincing answers - or even answers - to this question? David Cameron's 70,000 'moderates'? Or more likely, Sharia Law following Islamists in the 'Army of Conquest' already accused of war crimes and atrocities as bad as ISIS. In fact, if they had all the resources at Assad and Russia's disposal, they'd be dropping poison gas barrels on Shia muslim civilians as well, I imagine.
None of this means I'm a Trump supporter, anything but, but people should wake up and consider what a Clinton presidency - which is almost certain now, considering Trump's daily self destruction - is going to entail. You thought Bush was bad?
Oh you won't get any of that in the biased 'MSM'. This media idolatry of Clinton is sickening. >:(
They aren't idolizing Hillary. Trump gets a lot of coverage when he's being outrageous. Actually the liberal media don't like Hillary going back to Bill's time in office. Things she does that are positive, rarely get press coverage.
They aren't idolizing Hillary. Trump gets a lot of coverage when he's being outrageous. Actually the liberal media don't like Hillary going back to Bill's time in office. Things she does that are positive, rarely get press coverage.
Is that American media? I was talking about UK media tbh, I should've made that clear. BBC for instance had a sycophantic 'One Show' edition devoted to her plugging her book... the Guardian is so far up her backside it's untrue... ITV News had reports from 'an average American home' with 'average Americans' watching "Hillary's" speech that were more like a Danny Baker Daz advert ("I can't believe it's so white and clean!")... even the two Times papers were barely concealing their preference in 'reporting' the two conventions.
Of course it's US media that's going to be forming the opinions though, I suppose. But nobody is seriously going to suggest people vote Trump. What an awful choice though, I rate Clinton as bad as Trump.
Cnn just reported President Hollandes comments re Trump ' his excesses make you want to retch' he said regarding Trumps behaviour towards Mr and Mrs Khan, his statements are "offensive and humiliating" and should the American people choose Trump " there will be consequences as a U.S. Election is a Global Election". Unprecedented comments from a World Leader IMO.
Is that American media? I was talking about UK media tbh, I should've made that clear. BBC for instance had a sycophantic 'One Show' edition devoted to her plugging her book... the Guardian is so far up her backside it's untrue... ITV News had reports from 'an average American home' with 'average Americans' watching "Hillary's" speech that were more like a Danny Baker Daz advert ("I can't believe it's so white and clean!")... even the two Times papers were barely concealing their preference in 'reporting' the two conventions.
Of course it's US media that's going to be forming the opinions though, I suppose. But nobody is seriously going to suggest people vote Trump. What an awful choice though, I rate Clinton as bad as Trump.
I'm not a massive fan of Hillary but 'as bad as Trump'? Come off it. Not even close.
Obama had it right - the man is utterly incompetent and frighteningly ignorant at the most basic levels. He is incapable of doing what the job entails day to day and he is demonstrating this pretty much consistently now.
He doesn't know anything at all about world affairs (see the Ukraine comment. ). He belittles all his opponents by attacking them - or if not them, their wives - personally at any perceived slight or attack on his ego, and he is frighteningly thin-skinned when it comes to criticism of himself or his ideas. He puts himself at the centre of everything. He is overtly misogynist and racist. He appears to have a genuine personality disorder (and I mean one that is likely diagnosable, not in the 'he's just not very nice' way - he lacks any empathy whatsoever and is both sociopathic and narcissistic.)
He has openly said previously that if he ever ran for president he would run for the Republicans because their voters are more stupid. He is committing enormous gaffes on a daily basis. This is a man that actually claims his multiple money earning businesses are 'sacrifices' for him personally while choosing to deliberately insult a member of the public whose son died for the country he is supposed to be serving. He has no 'diplomatic' or statesmanlike skills whatsoever - and NO experience of government.
All that Trump cares about is himself and feeding his ego. Hillary might be a lot of things but she is experienced, and nowhere near this level of ineptitude. If even Republicans are beginning to turn to the Democratic candidate because anything is better than Trump, you know you've got problems.
I'm not a massive fan of Hillary but 'as bad as Trump'? Come off it. Not even close.
Obama had it right - the man is utterly incompetent and frighteningly ignorant at the most basic levels. He is incapable of doing what the job entails day to day and he is demonstrating this pretty much consistently now.
I guess my only hope was that Trump might prove to be so clueless, the US ended up de facto run by an unofficial group of experienced civil servants. I gather this is what happened post-civil war when Gen Grant got elected and seemed to think the position was merely ceremonial (from what I remember from my history at school).
Most of Trump's policy positions - eg the 'wall' - are so completely unworkable they would never come to fruition.
The fact that those of Clinton (such as the Syria reset mentioned) will and that she does know exactly what she's doing scares me.
They aren't idolizing Hillary. Trump gets a lot of coverage when he's being outrageous. Actually the liberal media don't like Hillary going back to Bill's time in office. Things she does that are positive, rarely get press coverage.
I know Breitbart's a quite hysterical right-wing site, but if these facts about her campaign staff are true, it does reveal the utter hypocrisy that is at the core of the Clintons.
Why aren't the major papers over there investigating it? Even if they find it's false, they can print that. These rumours are swirling... feels like rumours have been constantly swirling round that pair for 25 years.
Comments
You mean almost no government at all - bar defence, police and firemen?
Or Freedom as Ron Paul called it.
Hillary is of course the diametric opposite.
And that he invited her.
No doubt he's got image makers and an Army of people around him
but the guy cant help himself.
You can see how the Debates are going to unfold. He's going to feel under attack from certain hosts. Then Clinton with Both being told something deeply offensive that's going to turn off floating voters.
the people who are going to vote for trump no matter what he says they wont change.
but even Fox news admits/reports unless he pulls over floating voters its over for him.
there's even Talk Ryan will unendorse him.
Trump had the perfect chance to prove so many people wrong, But just 2 weeks after
getting the official vote he' still doing the same old mistakes
BiB - he has really upped his attacks on CNN the last few days and they host the first debate
i wouldn't be surprised if he withdraws from them blaming the biased media
Of course he will. As soon as he is challenged he plays victim.
Just watching Bret Baier and even Fox despairing of him over last few days. I've not watched any Fox for weeks so surprised at their editorial. Mind you Greta will be still be his cheerleader in chief!
How about the cia operatives parents back trump?
Or they still going on about his comments to the khans?
how about you give credible links that suggest they should be reporting those ?
They shouldnt be reporting these things?
Her campaign manager received and failed to disclose 35 million dollars from the russian government...
Or that parents of a dead cia operative (who clinton branded liars) bacl trump
i didn't say they shouldn't be did i, if they are genuine
i asked for something to suggest they were actually credible stories and not just tinfoil hat stuff
They weren't political rivals and he wasn't threatening the establishment.
i've never really understood quite what someone means with the phrase "threatening the establishment", can you explain what trump will do if he is elected that will achieve that ?
or do you think that giving massive tax cuts to the richest people in society is somehow a "threat to the establishment" ?
to me trump is a far bigger threat to the "ordinary american" considering his tax plan gives them next to nothing, he isn't in favour of increasing the minimum wage, in fact saying he thinks states should be able to reduce the minimum wage and he is in favour of removing workplace regulations to allow companies to be more competitive
And as you can see the story was reported in the news.
And Clinton is fit?
You think "we came, we saw, he died" is a Presidential thing to say on the overthrow of Gaddafi? Doing childish impressions of Vladimir Putin in an interview like some third-rate Janet Brown? And that's just how she conducts herself in public, even before looking into the multiple scandals with which she and her oily husband have been associated.
And here's her latest... http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/29/hillary-clinton-will-reset-syria-policy-against-murderous-assad/
"Out of there" and replaced by whom? Why do none of these 'liberal interventionists' ever have convincing answers - or even answers - to this question? David Cameron's 70,000 'moderates'? Or more likely, Sharia Law following Islamists in the 'Army of Conquest' already accused of war crimes and atrocities as bad as ISIS. In fact, if they had all the resources at Assad and Russia's disposal, they'd be dropping poison gas barrels on Shia muslim civilians as well, I imagine.
None of this means I'm a Trump supporter, anything but, but people should wake up and consider what a Clinton presidency - which is almost certain now, considering Trump's daily self destruction - is going to entail. You thought Bush was bad?
Oh you won't get any of that in the biased 'MSM'. This media idolatry of Clinton is sickening. >:(
They aren't idolizing Hillary. Trump gets a lot of coverage when he's being outrageous. Actually the liberal media don't like Hillary going back to Bill's time in office. Things she does that are positive, rarely get press coverage.
Is that American media? I was talking about UK media tbh, I should've made that clear. BBC for instance had a sycophantic 'One Show' edition devoted to her plugging her book... the Guardian is so far up her backside it's untrue... ITV News had reports from 'an average American home' with 'average Americans' watching "Hillary's" speech that were more like a Danny Baker Daz advert ("I can't believe it's so white and clean!")... even the two Times papers were barely concealing their preference in 'reporting' the two conventions.
Of course it's US media that's going to be forming the opinions though, I suppose. But nobody is seriously going to suggest people vote Trump. What an awful choice though, I rate Clinton as bad as Trump.
I'm not a massive fan of Hillary but 'as bad as Trump'? Come off it. Not even close.
Obama had it right - the man is utterly incompetent and frighteningly ignorant at the most basic levels. He is incapable of doing what the job entails day to day and he is demonstrating this pretty much consistently now.
He doesn't know anything at all about world affairs (see the Ukraine comment. ). He belittles all his opponents by attacking them - or if not them, their wives - personally at any perceived slight or attack on his ego, and he is frighteningly thin-skinned when it comes to criticism of himself or his ideas. He puts himself at the centre of everything. He is overtly misogynist and racist. He appears to have a genuine personality disorder (and I mean one that is likely diagnosable, not in the 'he's just not very nice' way - he lacks any empathy whatsoever and is both sociopathic and narcissistic.)
He has openly said previously that if he ever ran for president he would run for the Republicans because their voters are more stupid. He is committing enormous gaffes on a daily basis. This is a man that actually claims his multiple money earning businesses are 'sacrifices' for him personally while choosing to deliberately insult a member of the public whose son died for the country he is supposed to be serving. He has no 'diplomatic' or statesmanlike skills whatsoever - and NO experience of government.
All that Trump cares about is himself and feeding his ego. Hillary might be a lot of things but she is experienced, and nowhere near this level of ineptitude. If even Republicans are beginning to turn to the Democratic candidate because anything is better than Trump, you know you've got problems.
I guess my only hope was that Trump might prove to be so clueless, the US ended up de facto run by an unofficial group of experienced civil servants. I gather this is what happened post-civil war when Gen Grant got elected and seemed to think the position was merely ceremonial (from what I remember from my history at school).
Most of Trump's policy positions - eg the 'wall' - are so completely unworkable they would never come to fruition.
The fact that those of Clinton (such as the Syria reset mentioned) will and that she does know exactly what she's doing scares me.
I know Breitbart's a quite hysterical right-wing site, but if these facts about her campaign staff are true, it does reveal the utter hypocrisy that is at the core of the Clintons.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2016/08/02/left-wing-media-ignores-hillary-clintons-campaign-chairman-bagging-35-million-putin/
Why aren't the major papers over there investigating it? Even if they find it's false, they can print that. These rumours are swirling... feels like rumours have been constantly swirling round that pair for 25 years.