Play Nice 45th President of the United States: Donald Trump - Part 2 (cont in pt. 3)

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Did trump bots spend months telling us that Hillary wanted to start a war with Russia?
WASHINGTON — Hillary Clinton made it abundantly clear Wednesday night that if she defeats Donald J. Trump next month she will enter the White House with the most contentious relationship with Russia of any president in more than three decades, and with a visceral, personal animus toward Vladimir V. Putin, its leader.

“We haven’t seen a you-can’t-trust-these-guys tone like this since the days of Ronald Reagan,” said Stephen Sestanovich, who served in President Bill Clinton’s State Department and is the author of “Maximalist: America in the World from Truman to Obama.” “But even that was more a systemic criticism of the Soviet Union. This is focused on Putin himself.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/21/us/hillary-clinton-donald-trump-putin-russia.html

Now quite seriously, (just to rehash for the 100th time since you guys keep speaking about Hillary) I wanted a better relationship with Russia, and I quite clearly recall reading this article)

Because Putin could eat Trump for lunch, and still have room for more. Hilary Clinton for all her faults had been at the pointy end of international diplomacy for thirty years, Trump is a reality TV star.

Then she should've defeated the reality TV star quite handily in the election.
That she was a walking corpse ?
Some of the health rumours peddled were absurd, and definitely had a swing on election results
People took advantage of a candidate literally being helped into a van after collapsing. The exact same would've occurred if it had've been Trump. I don't understand why that is so objectionable.
 
WASHINGTON — Hillary Clinton made it abundantly clear Wednesday night that if she defeats Donald J. Trump next month she will enter the White House with the most contentious relationship with Russia of any president in more than three decades, and with a visceral, personal animus toward Vladimir V. Putin, its leader.

“We haven’t seen a you-can’t-trust-these-guys tone like this since the days of Ronald Reagan,” said Stephen Sestanovich, who served in President Bill Clinton’s State Department and is the author of “Maximalist: America in the World from Truman to Obama.” “But even that was more a systemic criticism of the Soviet Union. This is focused on Putin himself.”


https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/21/us/hillary-clinton-donald-trump-putin-russia.html

Now quite seriously, (just to rehash for the 100th time since you guys keep speaking about Hillary) I wanted a better relationship with Russia, and I quite clearly recall reading this article)



Then she should've defeated the reality TV star quite handily in the election.

People took advantage of a candidate literally being helped into a van after collapsing. The exact same would've occurred if it had've been Trump. I don't understand why that is so objectionable.
im not saying I agree with the bolded but you obviously do, so you literally answered your own question as to why Putin preferred trump...
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Riddle me this ...

The Georgia 6th results in 2016 were:

Republicans 61.7%
Democrats 38.3%

( source)

The Georgia 6th results this week were

Republicans 51.9%
Democrats 48.1%

( source)

Now if those results had happened in a by-election in Australia, the main story would have been that swing. Despite winning the seat, the incumbent party would be pilloried with predictions of a wipeout at the next general election.

It's not being reported in the US media that way at all. The democrats aren't even pushing that line. Trump is claiming vindication and the Democrats have their tails between their legs.

I don't get it?

Does the voluntary voting thing change the whole dynamic? Or?
 
Riddle me this ...

The Georgia 6th results in 2016 were:

Republicans 61.7%
Democrats 38.3%

( source)

The Georgia 6th results this week were

Republicans 51.9%
Democrats 48.1%

( source)

Now if those results had happened in a by-election in Australia, the main story would have been that swing. Despite winning the seat, the incumbent party would be pilloried with predictions of a wipeout at the next general election.

It's not being reported in the US media that way at all. The democrats aren't even pushing that line. Trump is claiming vindication and the Democrats have their tails between their legs.

I don't get it?

Does the voluntary voting thing change the whole dynamic? Or?

Democrats threw the kitchen sink at the election and failed to come up with the goods. They do not want to highlight another failure of the "resistance". It's also interesting that Handel actually refused to back Trump, which could have actually hurt her; considering the crowd at her victory speech stated chanting "Trump!"
 
This gem is pretty damn funny.


DNC never actually handed over the "hacked" servers to intelligence agencies for external confirmation that it was Russia.
 
Riddle me this ...

The Georgia 6th results in 2016 were:

Republicans 61.7%
Democrats 38.3%

( source)

The Georgia 6th results this week were

Republicans 51.9%
Democrats 48.1%

( source)

Now if those results had happened in a by-election in Australia, the main story would have been that swing. Despite winning the seat, the incumbent party would be pilloried with predictions of a wipeout at the next general election.

It's not being reported in the US media that way at all. The democrats aren't even pushing that line. Trump is claiming vindication and the Democrats have their tails between their legs.

I don't get it?

Does the voluntary voting thing change the whole dynamic? Or?
Despite the previous results, it's seen as an underdog victory. It had a lot of parallels with the presidential election. One candidate with all the money, celebrity and MSM support, favored by polls etc. It seems like the DNC haven't learned that the public don't respond to Hollywood shills telling them how to think, and throwing endless money at an election doesn't guarantee victory.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Riddle me this ...

The Georgia 6th results in 2016 were:

Republicans 61.7%
Democrats 38.3%

( source)

The Georgia 6th results this week were

Republicans 51.9%
Democrats 48.1%
if you view the election as a referendum on trump (where he beat hillary by only a point in this seat) then dems lost ground..... from a certain point of view.

handel was a particularly weak candidate as well i thought.
 

3 things here.

1. He leaves it open that someone else recorded conversations.

2. This was a crafted tweet, worded by his legal team.

3. The WH had indicated he was to respond about the tapes today. This was the somewhat cowardly way of doing it to avoid further questions.
 
3 things here.

1. He leaves it open that someone else recorded conversations.

The Russians?

Lbamfe_2tz83enl7wH8GmIVRWkYDNv4FlsraMoUpOtrjXzd31LrELkAsUj5JX3fbm0HSB_rojJxCOnaY9-LA0Wq0G2Sz0nhS_MhrfwM=w250-h138-nc
 
if you view the election as a referendum on trump (where he beat hillary by only a point in this seat) then dems lost ground..... from a certain point of view.

Ah, that makes sense then, thanks!
 
Despite the previous results, it's seen as an underdog victory. It had a lot of parallels with the presidential election. One candidate with all the money, celebrity and MSM support, favored by polls etc. It seems like the DNC haven't learned that the public don't respond to Hollywood shills telling them how to think, and throwing endless money at an election doesn't guarantee victory.

Right wing pacs spent as much money as the dems.

This idea that Handel was underfunded in comparison is a joke
 
Tapes? What tapes?

Seems the orange buffoon was lying about this as well. Seems that when he opens his mouth nothing falls out but bullshit.

Not a credible person to lead a country the size of the USA, seriously, are the Trump fans here going to twist his lies into his favour?

http://www.news.com.au/world/north-...s/news-story/8905a60ae4aa9f6650beea7180822929
I watched a Fox News interview this morning where the Trumpeteer deflected, going on about the illegal leaks from other sources being much more important than a president who exaggerates now and then. They have an answer for anything. Beats me why they don't get called on it.
 
So you dispute the findings of a completely independent body that is now overseen by the Republicans, that there was evidence that Russia hacked into state voter files and targeted them with fake news about Hillary on social media.

Wow, I never thought someone could be so brainwashed and still work out how to turn on a computer.

PS: Don't forget sanctions on Russia increased under the Democrats and especially while Hilary was Secretary of State. Trump had already talked about Putin being nice and easing sactions. This could have been due to his own opinion or the fact that he was colluding with Russia. That part is unknown at this stage.
Or maybe the two countries will prosper economically if they have a working relationship.
 
Did Trump say he had tapes?

He implied and then took 41 days to address the implications.

Stop letting him get away with lies based on technicalities. Where is your moral compass?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top