It’s really a no brainer.
Good article.
In these times article]
never mind
never mindYeah CC, never mind.
Neocon chickenhawks are incredibly stupid about everything other than making money out of death and destruction of others. They are also, essentially, cowards, sending others to kill and die for their profits. No surprise that they would choose the “devil” they can predict rather than the “devil” they can’t predict. Hillary, if POTUS, will be controlled to a great extent by her voting constituency, the Constitution, and her mandate (which will necessarily include some Sanders mandate influence). Trump, if POTUS, will be controlled to a great extent, by none of these things, as much as by his own whims and impulses.
Neocon chickenhawks are incredibly stupid about everything other than making money out of death and destruction of others. They are also, essentially, cowards, sending others to kill and die for their profits. No surprise that they would choose the "devil" they can predict rather than the "devil" they can't predict. Hillary, if POTUS, will be controlled to a great extent by her voting constituency, the Constitution, and her mandate (which will necessarily include some Sanders mandate influence). Trump, if POTUS, will be controlled to a great extent, by none of these things, as much as by his own whims and impulses.Tim, your past political predictions and meanderings are almost always wrong and ridiculous. You have absolutely nothing to base this on. Hillary won't be controlled by her constituency....all 20-25% of the US voters. Hillary has shown she is controlled by Wall St influences and Global Politicking. She is Power Hungry and has voted for war and combat strikes multiple times. Trump has repeatedly criticized war. The fact that you write such drivel makes you look comical.
V, and you think being reduced to a being a Trump Will Save US Fan
isn’t a tad hysterical ?
V, and you think being reduced to a being a Trump Will Save US Fan isn't a tad hysterical ?Quote hysterical. Trump is out for himself and has no qualifications to be president. An Open Letter to Trump Voters from His Top Strategist Turned Defector]
He doesn't want the White House. He just wants to be able to say that he could have run the White House. He’s achieved that already and then some. If there is any question, take it from someone who was recruited to help the candidate succeed, and initially very much wanted him to do so. The hard truth is: Trump only cares about Trump.Edit: Turns out the headline is misleading, and the author was disingenuous. Trump denounced the PAC last year, and it folded in October 2015. The author has no inside information and apparently did not have access to Donald Trump.
Neocon chickenhawks are incredibly stupid about everything other than making money out of death and destruction of others. They are also, essentially, cowards, sending others to kill and die for their profits. No surprise that they would choose the "devil" they can predict rather than the "devil" they can't predict. Hillary, if POTUS, will be controlled to a great extent by her voting constituency, the Constitution, and her mandate (which will necessarily include some Sanders mandate influence). Trump, if POTUS, will be controlled to a great extent, by none of these things, as much as by his own whims and impulses.Tim, your past political predictions and meanderings are almost always wrong and ridiculous. You have absolutely nothing to base this on. Hillary won't be controlled by her constituency....all 20-25% of the US voters. Hillary has shown she is controlled by Wall St influences and Global Politicking. She is Power Hungry and has voted for war and combat strikes multiple times. Trump has repeatedly criticized war. The fact that you write such drivel makes you look comical. Are you concerned that I may look comical? Are you embarrassed for me? Or are you just inserting insulting trite quips as is your standard operating procedure? As far as Hillary being controlled by her voting constituency, to a great degree: Of course she will. She will want to be re-elected to a 2nd term. Trump encourages his own constituents and campaign staff in being violent. If he has repeatedly criticized war, as you contend, he has also repeatedly made assertions that can set the stage for conflict. And anything that Trump says is subject to being amended or reversed by the next thing that he says or by something he says the next day or the next week..
Tim, your past political predictions and meanderings are almost always wrong and ridiculous...I think you are confabulating. (But then I am almost as biased in my own perspective, as you are in yours.)
You have absolutely nothing to base this on. Hillary won't be controlled by her constituency....all 20-25% of the US voters. Hillary has shown she is controlled by Wall St influences and Global Politicking. She is Power Hungry and has voted for war and combat strikes multiple times. Trump has repeatedly criticized war. The fact that you write such drivel makes you look comical.How does that make her any different than most other politicians operating at her level? Obama reneged on most of his promises to clean up Wall Street, the amount of wealth held by individuals there has gone up significantly in the last eight years. His assassination by drones are arguably war crimes as they target many people based on the pattern of their lives, not whether or not they're an actual and imminent threat to the US. Thousands have died in this campaign that is most likely making the world less safe not more. ISIS certainly isn't having any problem recruiting worldwide. I don't think I need to catalogue what the Bush administrations have been like in this regard, but criminal is probably a good place to start. As for Trump, he'll say virtually anything to provoke the kind of reactions he then exploits to enhance his power, so his pronouncements on anything are meaningless.
Tim, your past political predictions and meanderings are almost always wrong and ridiculous...I think you are confabulating. (But then I am almost as biased in my own perspective, as you are in yours.) I could start digging them out....you've probably forgotten about them.
I’ve said all I need to say.
Obviously most of you folks only watch politics for the red meat that’s thrown at you.
How does that make her any different than most other politicians operating at her level?It doesn't. Mostly. Except, she isn't a politician. And she isn't operating at any level at the moment. She's a candidate. And there are 2 other candidates that are completely different than her. Both are outriders who have taken zero corporate campaign funding. Both represent a a paradigm shift in party politics and changing voter dynamics. Hillary on the other hand is a dinosaur left over from the 90s. A careerist who just can't let go. And who will try to make a legacy for herself with some blundering conflict overseas draped under the auspices of Democracy and freedom. I'm 90% certain of this.
How does that make her any different than most other politicians operating at her level?It doesn't. Mostly. Except, she isn't a politician. And she isn't operating at any level at the moment. She's a candidate. The ignorance contained in these statements is staggering. You need to look up the definition of "politician."
Hillary on the other hand is a dinosaur left over from the 90s. A careerist who just can't let go. And who will try to make a legacy for herself with some blundering conflict overseas draped under the auspices of Democracy and freedom. I'm 90% certain of this.Are you being "deductive" here?
How does that make her any different than most other politicians operating at her level?It doesn't. Mostly. Except, she isn't a politician. And she isn't operating at any level at the moment. She's a candidate. And there are 2 other candidates that are completely different than her. Both are outriders who have taken zero corporate campaign funding. Both represent a a paradigm shift in party politics and changing voter dynamics. Hillary on the other hand is a dinosaur left over from the 90s. A careerist who just can't let go. And who will try to make a legacy for herself with some blundering conflict overseas draped under the auspices of Democracy and freedom. I'm 90% certain of this. Her whole life has been directed towards politics including her marriage, I think that makes her entirely a politician. And that's the level she's always operated on, climbing to the top to get a shot at enacting her agenda. I don't disagree with what you say about the other candidates, and what she's likely to do, Hillary Clinton does represent a past that needs to change if the US wants to remain relevant or even free I think.
Are you being "deductive" here?Oh Darron, Hell hath no fury.... :lol: That's based on real analysis. Actual analysis of Clinton's statements and actions.
Her whole life has been directed towards politics including her marriage, I think that makes her entirely a politician. And that's the level she's always operated on, climbing to the top to get a shot at enacting her agenda. I don't disagree with what you say about the other candidates, and what she's likely to do, Hillary Clinton does represent a past that needs to change if the US wants to remain relevant or even free I think.And that's at the heart of informed, intelligent voter's minds. The rest are satisfied with red meat and soundbytes. Period. Not only relevant and free, but taking a new course away from interventionism and damaging globalist policies. Working on building America and repairing all of the damage, neglect and disparity here in our own country.
And that's at the heart of informed, intelligent voter's minds. The rest are satisfied with red meat and soundbytes. Period. Not only relevant and free, but taking a new course away from interventionism and damaging globalist policies. Working on building America and repairing all of the damage, neglect and disparity here in our own country.I agree, but how do you do that when from what I can see the US has intentionally been set up in the last century or more to be interventionist in the interests of just a few Americans. As long as the US keeps producing enough money, weapons and soldiers to use them all over the globe the people really calling the shots don't seem to give a crap what happens to the rest of the country. I'm saying this as someone who has a relative in the US armed forces deployed somewhere halfway around the world fighting people who will cut his head off if he's ever taken alive. I hate to say it but the leadership in America has taken on an imperialist stink that has nothing to do with what so many generations of Americans have thought they were building. And that applies to many in the Democrats as well as the Republicans.
I hate to say it but the leadership in America has taken on an imperialist stink that has nothing to do with what so many generations of Americans have thought they were building. And that applies to many in the Democrats as well as the Republicans.On the subject of parties...we'll just have to see what happens. Lot's in flux right now. Believe me the Imperialists(or whatever you want to call them..the establishment, the entrenched economic/political system etc) would like nothing more than to see Trump and Sanders go quietly away. The powers that be have very good ways of getting everybody to go back to sleep. But maybe not....This election cycle is a huge mandate on change. Lots of dynamics are changing.
Tim, your past political predictions and meanderings are almost always wrong and ridiculous...I think you are confabulating. (But then I am almost as biased in my own perspective, as you are in yours.) I could start digging them out... In order to prove you statement to be true, you would have to "dig out" ALL of my political predictions and what you call "meanderings" (what I would call sharing my insightful thoughts) and then compare the # of correct predictions to the incorrect ones. Also you would need to support which of my "meanderings" were ridiculous, and which were not. Even I am not so entertained by my postings, that I would attempt such a feat. But please feel free to do so, if you are intent on making (what I believe is) a false assertion.