2016 USA Presidential election thread II: And. Here. We. Go!

[Zealot]

Does she really think people click on those links, this is A+ implosion

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_a...are_worse.html

Here's the actual link, because yes, people do click on it.

[myreality]

Does she really think people click on those links, this is A+ implosion

God forbid you link the source.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_a...are_worse.html

It may be a little biased, but it has 239 reasons to not vote for trump and 1 reason to not vote for Hillary. They also go through the Amendments for reasons to not vote trump. A bit too extreme to get your point across in my opinion, but it sources everything appropriately.


Edit:
Damnit, Zealot got to it first. But its what i expect out of my future president.

[Fondue]

thats the great thing about viral screencaps, there is no link to click and it makes her look absolutely insane


idk why my phone makes the pics so bigly samsung really is the devil

[Tyrath]

So you're saying you intentionally mislead to make her look worse? Got it.

[myreality]

thats the great thing about viral screencaps, there is no link to click and it makes her look absolutely insane


idk why my phone makes the pics so bigly samsung really is the devil

Yup, must be great to post things you have not read and understood before hand. Not silly at all.

[Fondue]

Yup, must be great to post things you have not read and understood before hand. Not silly at all.

I did read it, but not before seeing a picture of a tweet that implied she was either the most unpopular or most corrupt presidential candidate of all time.

[kisada]

honestly just makes you look like even more of a fucking idiot than usual.

[myreality]

I did read it, but not before seeing a picture of a tweet that implied she was either the most unpopular or most corrupt presidential candidate of all time.

Then why not post the link?

[Gryffes]

Does she really think people click on those links, this is A+ implosion

Holy shit I thought this was a /pol/ post, it's fucking real.

lol.

[Zealot]

I would never have gone to her Twitter and looked at it myself if not for you posting that picture, so you are sitting at negative 5 stars for getting your point across here.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

[arus2001]

To be honest, I think more of the crazy rhetoric would be acted upon had they the actual opportunity. Obviously, this is where stuff like the Secret Service and working with local officials to help secure venues acts as a hard counter, but all it takes is a small handgun or other implement of death to lead to tragedy.

Trump being on record claiming he won't accept the results if he loses and earlier on in the campaign practically calling for a hit on Hillary aren't cool, even if a bunch of ignorant fucknuts are thinking it out in Podunk. Stereotypes come about for a reason, and the deplorables only have themselves to blame for that. Doesn't really matter if they're 50%, 20%, or even 100% of his base. They exist to the degree that people have noticed and it can be fucking frightening if they are given the opportunity to act on their lunacy.

In the end, I don't condone whatever protester violence has gone on throughout this process, and let's not kid ourselves if people aren't stealing/vandalizing Hillary signs, too. That's inevitably pack and parcel with politics. While some have viewed this cycle as the best thing ever for entertainment value, what it truthfully has been for America is pretty depressing.

[myreality]

To be honest, I think more of the crazy rhetoric would be acted upon had they the actual opportunity. Obviously, this is where stuff like the Secret Service and working with local officials to help secure venues acts as a hard counter, but all it takes is a small handgun or other implement of death to lead to tragedy.

Trump being on record claiming he won't accept the results if he loses and earlier on in the campaign practically calling for a hit on Hillary aren't cool, even if a bunch of ignorant fucknuts are thinking it out in Podunk. Stereotypes come about for a reason, and the deplorables only have themselves to blame for that. Doesn't really matter if they're 50%, 20%, or even 100% of his base. They exist to the degree that people have noticed and it can be fucking frightening if they are given the opportunity to act on their lunacy.

It's a small chance, but I worry that after Trump realized he just destroyed his name brand and with little to no other revenue he will take advantage of these people's mindset and incite them further. Him becoming another Hitler standing on a stage to give release of these peoples hatred is what worries me. It won't last long but a lot of damage could still happen.

[Byrthnoth]

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_a...th_russia.html

[Fondue]

https://twitter.com/FranklinFoer/sta...06731203567616

Shes also retweeted this mess...... "A group of computer scientists believes a trump server was communicating with a russian bank"

fucking LOL


beaten unironically by byrth, feels bad man

For the TL:DR crowd- Smart people say something fishy's going on with Trump-owned server that strongly suggests email contact discussing political matters between someone connected to Trump/the Trump campaign/the Trump organization and Russia/a Russian bank, but it's too close to the election to figure out exactly what in time so Slate finally said eff it and ran the story.

[Byrthnoth]

I'd summarize it like this:
1) Trump has an e-mail server that pretty much only talks to a Russian bank run by Putin's bro
2) When the Times asked the bank what was up, Trump's server disappeared
3) 4 days later, a new server on the same box appeared.
4) Its first interaction with the outside world was a communication from the Russian bank.

tl;dr: Trump has a private e-mail server dedicated to talking to Russia.

[Fondue]

The entire article is structured in such a way as to consistently overshadow the facts determined, that there's nothing in particular to be considered worrisome.

[myreality]

I'd summarize it like this:
1) Trump has an e-mail server that pretty much only talks to a Russian bank run by Putin's bro
2) When the Times asked the bank what was up, Trump's server disappeared
3) 4 days later, a new server on the same box appeared.
4) Its first interaction with the outside world was a communication from the Russian bank.

tl;dr: Trump has a private e-mail server dedicated to talking to Russia.

Is it a leap to think that this may head in a direction that can accuse Trump of being a Russian surrogate to enact policies that benefit Russia? If so, wouldn't that be espionage at the least and treason at the most?

[myreality]

The entire article is structured in such a way as to consistently overshadow the facts determined, that there's nothing in particular to be considered worrisome.

This is what we call building evidence. Its good to not make a conclusion until all the facts are present. Something that seems to be lacking these days.

Also it is very, very worrisome if Trump has a secret line to Russia.

[Byrthnoth]

there's nothing in particular to be considered worrisome.

What "isn't worrisome" about 50% of the candidates with any shot of winning the election being in close talks with a nation that has been our largest geopolitical adversary for the last 60 years?

[Aerin]

The entire article is structured in such a way as to consistently overshadow the facts determined

I'm gonna go ahead and save this quote. Something tells me it could have some use later. Just a gut feeling.