US Presidential Election

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

US Presidential Election

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 7 of 31 < 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 >

Ray in Houston Houston 22 Sep 16 3.14pm
Originally posted by Rubin Here's such a great chap, is Barack: [Link] He's supposedly doing it as he's scared to provoke Saudi, yet doesn't mind continually provoking Russia. This is a bad call. The US' relationship with Saudi Arabia is self-destructive at best, and the continued denial of its involvement in 9/11 and terrorism in general is a travesty. We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football.
Alert a moderator to this post

Ray in Houston

Houston 22 Sep 16 3.14pm

Send a Private Message to Ray in Houston

Originally posted by Rubin

Here's such a great chap, is Barack:

[Link]

He's supposedly doing it as he's scared to provoke Saudi, yet doesn't mind continually provoking Russia.

This is a bad call. The US' relationship with Saudi Arabia is self-destructive at best, and the continued denial of its involvement in 9/11 and terrorism in general is a travesty.

We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football.

Alert a moderator to this post

Ray in Houston Houston 22 Sep 16 3.19pm
Originally posted by Rubin Just imagine the media reaction if Trump was exposed for doing something such as pocketing nearly 100% of aid money donated for a natural disaster: [Link] Nope. World Net Daily doesn't have a shred of credibility. It's the mothership of right-wing conspiracy theorists. Meanwhile, the Washington Post is reporting on actual fraud involving the Trump Foundation. [Link] We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football.
Alert a moderator to this post

Ray in Houston

Houston 22 Sep 16 3.19pm

Originally posted by Rubin

Just imagine the media reaction if Trump was exposed for doing something such as pocketing nearly 100% of aid money donated for a natural disaster:

[Link]

Nope. World Net Daily doesn't have a shred of credibility. It's the mothership of right-wing conspiracy theorists.

Meanwhile, the Washington Post is reporting on actual fraud involving the Trump Foundation. [Link]

We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football.

Alert a moderator to this post

OknotOK Cockfosters, London 22 Sep 16 4.09pm
Originally posted by .TUX. Yeah, I believe so. I've nothing against Obama, but let's not over-egg the pudding when it comes to his 'economic achievements' when many statistics (unfortunately) tell us a different story. That's all i'm saying. There's a world of difference between overestimating his economic achievements and suggesting that the situation he will leave to his successor is worse than the one he inherited in 2008. On just about every conceivable measure the economy is better (the only one being indebtedness, which is largely as a result of the collapse of the economy prior to his election). Now you can argue about whether that is down to him, or whether it has recovered as much as it should have done. But the US economy is clearly and undeniably in a better shape than it was in 2008. Edited by OknotOK (22 Sep 2016 4.10pm) "It's almost like a moral decision. Except not really cos noone is going to find out," Jez, Peep Show
Alert a moderator to this post

OknotOK

Cockfosters, London 22 Sep 16 4.09pm

Originally posted by .TUX.

Yeah, I believe so.
I've nothing against Obama, but let's not over-egg the pudding when it comes to his 'economic achievements' when many statistics (unfortunately) tell us a different story.
That's all i'm saying.

There's a world of difference between overestimating his economic achievements and suggesting that the situation he will leave to his successor is worse than the one he inherited in 2008.

On just about every conceivable measure the economy is better (the only one being indebtedness, which is largely as a result of the collapse of the economy prior to his election).

Now you can argue about whether that is down to him, or whether it has recovered as much as it should have done. But the US economy is clearly and undeniably in a better shape than it was in 2008.

Edited by OknotOK (22 Sep 2016 4.10pm)

"It's almost like a moral decision. Except not really cos noone is going to find out," Jez, Peep Show

Alert a moderator to this post

.TUX. 22 Sep 16 8.13pm
Originally posted by OknotOK There's a world of difference between overestimating his economic achievements and suggesting that the situation he will leave to his successor is worse than the one he inherited in 2008. On just about every conceivable measure the economy is better (the only one being indebtedness, which is largely as a result of the collapse of the economy prior to his election). Now you can argue about whether that is down to him, or whether it has recovered as much as it should have done. But the US economy is clearly and undeniably in a better shape than it was in 2008. Edited by OknotOK (22 Sep 2016 4.10pm) The words often spouted by those who only ever look at the Dow as a gauge? A market who's strength is based on nothing more than QE money and hope. One of us is right. But which one? Buy Litecoin.
Alert a moderator to this post

.TUX.

22 Sep 16 8.13pm

Originally posted by OknotOK

There's a world of difference between overestimating his economic achievements and suggesting that the situation he will leave to his successor is worse than the one he inherited in 2008.

On just about every conceivable measure the economy is better (the only one being indebtedness, which is largely as a result of the collapse of the economy prior to his election).

Now you can argue about whether that is down to him, or whether it has recovered as much as it should have done. But the US economy is clearly and undeniably in a better shape than it was in 2008.

Edited by OknotOK (22 Sep 2016 4.10pm)

The words often spouted by those who only ever look at the Dow as a gauge? A market who's strength is based on nothing more than QE money and hope.

One of us is right. But which one?

Buy Litecoin.

Alert a moderator to this post

Rubin 22 Sep 16 9.47pm
Originally posted by Ray in Houston Nope. World Net Daily doesn't have a shred of credibility. It's the mothership of right-wing conspiracy theorists. Meanwhile, the Washington Post is reporting on actual fraud involving the Trump Foundation. [Link] Here you go Ray. I'm genuinely not sure if the Daily Caller is credible or not, but it looks like their findings are from the IRS. [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

Rubin

22 Sep 16 9.47pm

Originally posted by Ray in Houston

Nope. World Net Daily doesn't have a shred of credibility. It's the mothership of right-wing conspiracy theorists.

Meanwhile, the Washington Post is reporting on actual fraud involving the Trump Foundation. [Link]

Here you go Ray. I'm genuinely not sure if the Daily Caller is credible or not, but it looks like their findings are from the IRS.

[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

matt_himself Matataland 22 Sep 16 10.06pm
The more I see of Hilary, the more she comes across as a very poor candidate. She appears to be mentally and physically exhausted. I also think she doesn't have the ability to land a punch on Trump. She seems timid and lacklustre. Maybe there is some strategy I don't understand that her team is employing but at the moment, if I were a betting man, I would stick money on Trump winning. The momentum is with him, like it or not. BTW, I really don't know who I would vote for if I was American. There are elements of Trump that are boreish & plain wrong, although I do believe he would fall in line if elected. However, Hilary doesn't deserve to be rewarded with a single vote at present. Nasty business this election. "That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02
Alert a moderator to this post

matt_himself

Matataland 22 Sep 16 10.06pm

The more I see of Hilary, the more she comes across as a very poor candidate.

She appears to be mentally and physically exhausted.

I also think she doesn't have the ability to land a punch on Trump. She seems timid and lacklustre.

Maybe there is some strategy I don't understand that her team is employing but at the moment, if I were a betting man, I would stick money on Trump winning. The momentum is with him, like it or not.

BTW, I really don't know who I would vote for if I was American. There are elements of Trump that are boreish & plain wrong, although I do believe he would fall in line if elected. However, Hilary doesn't deserve to be rewarded with a single vote at present. Nasty business this election.

"That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02

Alert a moderator to this post

NickinOX Sailing country. 23 Sep 16 12.59am
Originally posted by Rubin Here you go Ray. I'm genuinely not sure if the Daily Caller is credible or not, but it looks like their findings are from the IRS. [Link] And, if this is true, it still pales by what is starting to come out about Trump's charity giving and how it was being used to pay his companies' bills. They both look like crooks to many people. If you come to a fork in the road, take it.
Alert a moderator to this post

NickinOX

Sailing country. 23 Sep 16 12.59am

Originally posted by Rubin

Here you go Ray. I'm genuinely not sure if the Daily Caller is credible or not, but it looks like their findings are from the IRS.

[Link]

And, if this is true, it still pales by what is starting to come out about Trump's charity giving and how it was being used to pay his companies' bills.

They both look like crooks to many people.

If you come to a fork in the road, take it.

Alert a moderator to this post

Rubin 23 Sep 16 1.39am
Originally posted by NickinOX And, if this is true, it still pales by what is starting to come out about Trump's charity giving and how it was being used to pay his companies' bills. They both look like crooks to many people. Perhaps he did, buy at least he wasn't selling government influence, uranium mining rights to Russia, whilst taking money from Saudi and other countries for arms deals: [Link] [Link] [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

Rubin

23 Sep 16 1.39am

Originally posted by NickinOX

And, if this is true, it still pales by what is starting to come out about Trump's charity giving and how it was being used to pay his companies' bills.

They both look like crooks to many people.

Perhaps he did, buy at least he wasn't selling government influence, uranium mining rights to Russia, whilst taking money from Saudi and other countries for arms deals:

[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

NickinOX Sailing country. 23 Sep 16 1.55am
Originally posted by Rubin Perhaps he did, buy at least he wasn't selling government influence, uranium mining rights to Russia, whilst taking money from Saudi and other countries for arms deals: [Link] [Link] [Link] Maybe that's because he wasn't yet in government? As I said, they both look like crooks to many people. If you come to a fork in the road, take it.
Alert a moderator to this post

NickinOX

Sailing country. 23 Sep 16 1.55am

Originally posted by Rubin

Perhaps he did, buy at least he wasn't selling government influence, uranium mining rights to Russia, whilst taking money from Saudi and other countries for arms deals:

[Link]

Maybe that's because he wasn't yet in government?

As I said, they both look like crooks to many people.

If you come to a fork in the road, take it.

Alert a moderator to this post

Ray in Houston Houston 25 Sep 16 9.46pm
Originally posted by .TUX. Yeah, I believe so. I've nothing against Obama, but let's not over-egg the pudding when it comes to his 'economic achievements' when many statistics (unfortunately) tell us a different story. That's all i'm saying. What statistics tell a different story? You made a claim about the debt increase, and I showed you the causes of the increase - which all go back to the tax structure, wars and economic catastrophe he inherited. I also showed you how he turned around the private sector job market. Meanwhile, he has reduced the deficit faster than any President since the Great Depression - which is good news because it slows the increase in the debt. Also, interest rates are low, inflation is low, unemployment is below 5%, the stock market has doubled, a gallon of gas is around $2, Ford & GM are alive and bin Laden is dead. Seriously, what more do you want? An aqueduct? We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football.
Alert a moderator to this post

Ray in Houston

Houston 25 Sep 16 9.46pm

Originally posted by .TUX.

What statistics tell a different story? You made a claim about the debt increase, and I showed you the causes of the increase - which all go back to the tax structure, wars and economic catastrophe he inherited. I also showed you how he turned around the private sector job market. Meanwhile, he has reduced the deficit faster than any President since the Great Depression - which is good news because it slows the increase in the debt.

Also, interest rates are low, inflation is low, unemployment is below 5%, the stock market has doubled, a gallon of gas is around $2, Ford & GM are alive and bin Laden is dead.

Seriously, what more do you want? An aqueduct?

We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football.

Alert a moderator to this post

Ray in Houston Houston 25 Sep 16 9.53pm
Originally posted by Rubin Here you go Ray. I'm genuinely not sure if the Daily Caller is credible or not, but it looks like their findings are from the IRS. [Link] Here's a discussion of the Clinton Foundation's issues with Haiti, from someone who wasn't mouth-breathing while typing. [Link] We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football.
Alert a moderator to this post

Ray in Houston

Houston 25 Sep 16 9.53pm

Originally posted by Rubin

Here you go Ray. I'm genuinely not sure if the Daily Caller is credible or not, but it looks like their findings are from the IRS.

[Link]

Here's a discussion of the Clinton Foundation's issues with Haiti, from someone who wasn't mouth-breathing while typing.

[Link]

We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football.

Alert a moderator to this post

Ray in Houston Houston 25 Sep 16 9.59pm
Originally posted by NickinOX Maybe that's because he wasn't yet in government? As I said, they both look like crooks to many people. You can't ask people to give you a billion dollars to help you get a job that pays $400k, without owing them something. This is the major flaw with the US electoral system, in that everyone elected to office owes some back-scratches. The bigger the job, the more and bigger the scratches. Preempting... Trump isn't "self-funding" his campaign. He has loaned his campaign money and he can take donations to his campaign and use them to pay himself back - which I am sure he will do ultimately. This is totally legal (and why politicians only "suspend" their campaigns when they quit, because suspending means they can still raise money with which they can do as they wish). The only thing wrong with it is the pretense that he's self-funding, which he isn't. We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football.
Alert a moderator to this post

Ray in Houston

Houston 25 Sep 16 9.59pm

Originally posted by NickinOX

Maybe that's because he wasn't yet in government?

As I said, they both look like crooks to many people.

You can't ask people to give you a billion dollars to help you get a job that pays $400k, without owing them something.

This is the major flaw with the US electoral system, in that everyone elected to office owes some back-scratches. The bigger the job, the more and bigger the scratches.

Preempting...
Trump isn't "self-funding" his campaign. He has loaned his campaign money and he can take donations to his campaign and use them to pay himself back - which I am sure he will do ultimately. This is totally legal (and why politicians only "suspend" their campaigns when they quit, because suspending means they can still raise money with which they can do as they wish). The only thing wrong with it is the pretense that he's self-funding, which he isn't.

We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football.

Alert a moderator to this post

Page 7 of 31 < 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

US Presidential Election

Site Map

New users

Existing users

Sponsors