Thread: 2016 Democratic US Presidential Candidates

Originally Posted by quimbian corholla

Have another swig from the drum chemical-boy,

Prime example QC. What's next?

Originally Posted by quimbian corholla

Originally Posted by RPETER65

Can you bring up some actual facts that prove your post.

Since when did facts matter to creationists and their lunatic political ideologies?

So i take it you cannot, simply use personal attracts when you have no facts. By the way sorry but those personal attracts don't work.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Booners, did you know you can ask Google questions? Like....

"what does 'quod prorsus fatuus' mean in english"

Originally Posted by quimbian corholla

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

The defence rests its case.

You REALLY missed a golden opportunity to write quod erat demonstrandum there!

I thought learning three words was about Booners limit for one day. Don't want to overload him.

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

NY POST: ‘CLINTON CASH AUTHOR DEMOLISHES HILLARY’S SELF-DEFENSE’

She's in big trouble, boys...

Well she's not, is she Booners?

Most people got bored with this a week or so after the book came out.

Yet more tired fake scandal bollocks.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

NY POST: ‘CLINTON CASH AUTHOR DEMOLISHES HILLARY’S SELF-DEFENSE’

She's in big trouble, boys...

Well she's not, is she Booners?

Most people got bored with this a week or so after the book came out.

Yet more tired fake scandal bollocks.

Oh yeah?

CLINTON WH COUNSELOR: HILLARY’S OBAMATRADE WAFFLING, SILENCE ON PUBLIC CORRUPTION MAY COST HER NOMINATION

Hillary Clinton’s silence on public corruption and refusal to take a firm stand on Obamatrade may cost her her party’s presidential nomination, argues President Bill Clinton’s former White House counselor.

Writing in Salon, Bill Curry blasts Clinton for trying to have it both ways on the Trans-Pacific Partnership deal that Clinton once called the “gold standard” in trade agreements but the party’s left-wing primary voters oppose.

“No one plays the game better than Hillary Clinton, the Harry Houdini of syntax,” Curry writes before noting that Clinton’s Obamatrade rhetoric “is of a piece with her entire 2016 campaign.”

He also notes that Clinton is “weakest on the sleeper issue of 2016: public corruption and the general debasement of politics and government.”

Hillary Clinton is going to lose: She doesn?t even see the frustrated progressive wave that will nominate Bernie Sanders - Salon.com

Going down faster than a $2 crack ho...

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

NY POST: ‘CLINTON CASH AUTHOR DEMOLISHES HILLARY’S SELF-DEFENSE’

She's in big trouble, boys...

Well she's not, is she Booners?

Most people got bored with this a week or so after the book came out.

Yet more tired fake scandal bollocks.

Oh yeah?

CLINTON WH COUNSELOR: HILLARY’S OBAMATRADE WAFFLING, SILENCE ON PUBLIC CORRUPTION MAY COST HER NOMINATION

Hillary Clinton’s silence on public corruption and refusal to take a firm stand on Obamatrade may cost her her party’s presidential nomination, argues President Bill Clinton’s former White House counselor.

Writing in Salon, Bill Curry blasts Clinton for trying to have it both ways on the Trans-Pacific Partnership deal that Clinton once called the “gold standard” in trade agreements but the party’s left-wing primary voters oppose.

“No one plays the game better than Hillary Clinton, the Harry Houdini of syntax,” Curry writes before noting that Clinton’s Obamatrade rhetoric “is of a piece with her entire 2016 campaign.”

He also notes that Clinton is “weakest on the sleeper issue of 2016: public corruption and the general debasement of politics and government.”

Hillary Clinton is going to lose: She doesn?t even see the frustrated progressive wave that will nominate Bernie Sanders - Salon.com

Going down faster than a $2 crack ho...

Another "opinion" piece that will be lost in time....

Originally Posted by RPETER65

Originally Posted by quimbian corholla

Originally Posted by RPETER65

Can you bring up some actual facts that prove your post.

Since when did facts matter to creationists and their lunatic political ideologies?

So i take it you cannot, simply use personal attracts when you have no facts. By the way sorry but those personal attracts don't work.

I am surprised that no one has decompiled this post of epic stupidity.


I am convinced that this is a Thai national who has been corrupted by religion. There is no way that anyone other than that or some back water hillbilly buffoon..

Oh..wait..

The sad truth is that most of the Clinton 'scandals' involve fairly complex issues that are far above the comprehension level of the average semi-literate American voter.

International trade? International finances? Oh, sure....right after they finish watching Oprah.

Remember, these are the people who gave America a virtually unknown 'city planner' simply because he screamed "CHANGE" a lot. Then, after four dismal years, they elected this simpleton AGAIN.

Welcome in advance, Madame President......

Originally Posted by Davis Knowlton

The sad truth is that most of the Clinton 'scandals' involve fairly complex issues that are far above the comprehension level of the average semi-literate American voter.

International trade? International finances? Oh, sure....right after they finish watching Oprah.

Remember, these are the people who gave America a virtually unknown 'city planner' simply because he screamed "CHANGE" a lot. Then, after four dismal years, they elected this simpleton AGAIN.

Welcome in advance, Madame President......

Whitewater, Travelgate and a few others are less complex than the latest one involving the Clinton Foundation.

Perhaps if Bernie Sanders hammers home a bit more on HRC's corrupt practices it'll get thru to the LIVs.

^Good luck. The average American voter has the attention span of a fruit fly.

Originally Posted by Davis Knowlton

The average American voter has the attention span of a fruit fly.

Boon is the first case in point..


It takes an idiot to make a village.

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Originally Posted by Davis Knowlton

The sad truth is that most of the Clinton 'scandals' involve fairly complex issues that are far above the comprehension level of the average semi-literate American voter.

International trade? International finances? Oh, sure....right after they finish watching Oprah.

Remember, these are the people who gave America a virtually unknown 'city planner' simply because he screamed "CHANGE" a lot. Then, after four dismal years, they elected this simpleton AGAIN.

Welcome in advance, Madame President......

Whitewater, Travelgate and a few others are less complex than the latest one involving the Clinton Foundation.

Perhaps if Bernie Sanders hammers home a bit more on HRC's corrupt practices it'll get thru to the LIVs.

Seriously, you're discussing "simpletons" when you elected Bush Jr TWICE?

Fucking hell!

I didn't discriminate between Democratic or Republican voters, Harry, I said 'American' voters.

Originally Posted by Davis Knowlton

I didn't discriminate between Democratic or Republican voters, Harry, I said 'American' voters.

Yes but when you can only choose from one of two, it shouldn't be that fucking difficult.

I mean who in their right minds would vote for Mitt the Twit or the coffin dodger?


Oh.....

Oooooh this will get Booners blubbing!

Ex-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has a commanding advantage for the Democratic presidential nomination and a lead of eight to 13 points over her most likely Republican foes, according to a new NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll.

“Democratic socialist” challenger, Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vermont, has been drawing big crowds — 5,500 in Denver over the weekend — but trails Clinton by a 75-15 percent margin among Democratic and Democratic-leaning voters.

In general election matchups, Clinton has a 48-40 percent lead over Jeb Bush, a 50-40 percent lead over Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, and a 51-37 percent advantage over Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker. Bush, Walker and Rubio lead the Republican field in the poll.

The survey was conducted June 14-18, shortly after the formal kickoff of Clinton’s campaign and spanning the formal launch of Bush’s bid for the White House.

Clinton has come under fire on fronts ranging from preferring Manhattan digs to her Brooklyn headquarters, to her family’s luxury vacation rentals in the Hamptons on Long Island and her vague position on proposed Pacific and Atlantic free trade agreements.

She is also a behind-closed-doors campaigner who was briefly in Seattle on Saturday for a private $2,700 a person fundraiser.

The only public event Clinton has held here over the last seven years was a 2014 book signing, followed by a Clinton Foundation fundraiser on the Eastside. The price of a seat at the head table was a whopping $50,000.

The criticism isn’t hitting home, according to the NBC/WSJ findings.

“Hillary Clinton continues to lap the field on the Democratic side,” said veteran Democratic pollster Peter Hart, who conducted the survey along with Republican opinion expert Bill McInturff.

Clinton occupies the “strongest and most advantageous position” of any non-incumbent seeking his or her party’s nomination of any candidate he has ever seen, McInturff told NBC News.

A whopping 92 percent of Democratic voters say they could support Clinton, a figure that has climbed from 86 percent in March. Despite that level of support, however, 62 percent of Democrats said they want a contested race for their party’s nomination.

Bush is doing much better among the Republicans in recent months. Seventy-five percent of the Republican voters polled said they could support the former Florida governor, up from 49 percent in March.

The Republican field is still splintered. Bush was on top in the poll with 22 percent, followed by Walker at 17 percent. (Walker has been running ahead in Iowa caucus polls.) Rubio was third with 14 percent, followed by retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson at 11 percent.

The pecking order is important, because Fox News says it will allow only 10 GOP candidates on stage when the right-wing channel hosts the first Republican debate later this summer. It will consult polls in making its pick.

The other six who would qualify, according to NBC/WSJ figures, are ex-Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee (9 percent), Sen. Rand Paul, R-Kentucky (7 percent), ex-Texas Gov. Rick Perry (5 percent), Texas Sen. Ted Cruz (4 percent), New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (4 percent) and former business executive Carly Fiorino (2 percent).

Republic strategists have been extremely nervous at the possible presence of billionaire real estate mogul Donald Trump on stage. Trump announced last week, with scalding remarks about immigrants as well as his GOP opponents.

He gets exactly 1 percent in the NBC/WSJ poll, the same as Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-South Carolina.

Ex-Sen. Rick Santorum, who won primaries and caucuses in 2012, does not even reach one percent.

President Obama had an unchanged 48 percent job approval rating in the survey, which was conducted June 14-18, with interviews of 1,000 voters (400 by cell phone) and has a margin of error of plus/minus 3.1 percent.

Hillary Clinton is the candidate to beat in 2016: NBC/Wall Street Journal poll - Strange Bedfellows ? Politics News

Originally Posted by quimbian corholla

All these polls showing her with a big lead could well be a poisoned chalice.

She'd better hope that Dems turn out to vote in record numbers and aren't lulled into a complacent prediction of victory because nothing is going to get the Repub vote out like trying to defeat HRC.

It's OK, those KKK boys funding the Republican candidates should get them off their arses.

New emails show possible Benghazi deception by Hillary Clinton, Obama admin.



Imagine that! HRC's zombies turning on her?

"Congressional Republicans released nearly 200 pages of emails involving former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, saying Monday they raised questions about whether the Obama administration and the Democratic presidential candidate herself were truthful when they said they turned over all of her email communications on Benghazi.

Rep. Trey Gowdy, chairman of the House Select Committee on Benghazi, which is looking into the 2012 terrorist attack in Libya, said the new emails were obtained directly from Sidney Blumenthal, a Clinton confidant, and demanded to know why they weren’t turned over first by the State Department. He ordered the department to search its files to see whether it has them but failed to turn them over, or whether Mrs. Clinton never released them in the first place, which would contradict her public statements.

“Once again the Benghazi Committee uncovers information that should already be part of the public record but was not made available to the American people or congressional investigators,” Mr. Gowdy, South Carolina Republican, said.

He also said the emails show Mrs. Clinton soliciting help and wisdom from Mr. Blumenthal, who had no official position in the State Department. The former secretary has said his emails were unsolicited.

The Benghazi probe interviewed Mr. Blumenthal last week, and Democrats have demanded that the transcript be released immediately, saying it would put the emails in context, proving they are being used as a political ploy by the GOP.

“By the chairman’s own admission, these emails have absolutely nothing to do with the attacks in Benghazi, and their selective release demonstrates the select committee’s singular focus on attacking Hillary Clinton and her bid for president,” said Rep. Elijah E. Cummings, the ranking Democrat on the probe panel.

State Department spokesman John Kirby said some of the emails released by the committee Monday had already been provided to Congress, but he couldn’t speak to the entire set.

“We’re still working our way through those emails,” he told reporters. He suggested that any emails that weren’t among the 300 released to the committee may have been outside of the scope of inquiry focused on Benghazi.

Mrs. Clinton has admitted she set up and used her own email server and account during her time at the State Department, which meant her communications weren’t able to be searched under open records or congressional information requests, as required by law.

Prodded by Mr. Gowdy’s committee last year, nearly two years after she left office, Mrs. Clinton turned over to the State Department about 30,000 messages she decided were related to official business. She said she withheld and expunged another 32,000 messages and says she has wiped the server clean to prevent anyone from recovering any of them.

The State Department is under a court order to produce all of the emails publicly, though it claimed to have already given Mr. Gowdy’s committee all emails related to the Benghazi investigation.

Mr. Gowdy said the latest releases, however, poke a hole in that version, saying that either Mrs. Clinton didn’t actually turn over all appropriate messages to her former employer or else the State Department didn’t comply with the committee’s demand for information.

“These emails should have been part of the public record when Secretary Clinton left office and, at a bare minimum, included when the State Department released Clinton’s self-selected records on Libya,” Mr. Gowdy said.

He also questioned the propriety of Mrs. Clinton relying on Mr. Blumenthal for external advice on Libya given that the State Department had its own intelligence-gathering tools that she should have been using.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...email-scandal/

Y'all really thought Benghazi was going away?

In your dreams

Whats amazing here is the number of times she's been outed as a fraud and the number of times she's slimmed her way clear. As Davis says, American voters have a memory like a fruit fly or they are simply stupid? Perhaps both, looking at bsnub one begins to wonder.

Originally Posted by ltnt

Whats amazing here is the number of times she's been outed as a fraud

Outed for what? By whom? When?
As usual your own poster boy pasted up the answer to your question.

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

“By the chairman’s own admission, these emails have absolutely nothing to do with the attacks in Benghazi, and their selective release demonstrates the select committee’s singular focus on attacking Hillary Clinton and her bid for president,” said Rep. Elijah E. Cummings, the ranking Democrat on the probe panel.
State Department spokesman John Kirby said some of the emails released by the committee Monday had already been provided to Congress, but he couldn’t speak to the entire set.
“We’re still working our way through those emails,” he told reporters. He suggested that any emails that weren’t among the 300 released to the committee may have been outside of the scope of inquiry focused on Benghazi.

Once again ScandalGate bursts wide open and all the lies come flooding out.

Originally Posted by ltnt

As Davis says, American voters have a memory like a fruit fly or they are simply stupid? Perhaps both, looking at bsnub one begins to wonder.

Yes they do they elected two Bushes and a Reagan. Who combined have done more damage to this country then the previous ten presidents.

With regards to you ltnpee you have not made one valid contribution to speakers corner. Not one. You whinge a lot but have not posted up one compelling argument or made one compelling point. You are an over inflated windbag.

Originally Posted by MrG

Originally Posted by ltnt

Whats amazing here is the number of times she's been outed as a fraud

Outed for what? By whom? When?
As usual your own poster boy pasted up the answer to your question.

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

“By the chairman’s own admission, these emails have absolutely nothing to do with the attacks in Benghazi, and their selective release demonstrates the select committee’s singular focus on attacking Hillary Clinton and her bid for president,” said Rep. Elijah E. Cummings, the ranking Democrat on the probe panel.
State Department spokesman John Kirby said some of the emails released by the committee Monday had already been provided to Congress, but he couldn’t speak to the entire set.
“We’re still working our way through those emails,” he told reporters. He suggested that any emails that weren’t among the 300 released to the committee may have been outside of the scope of inquiry focused on Benghazi.

Once again ScandalGate bursts wide open and all the lies come flooding out.

Standby, it's coming.

Think of Watergate w/out a Deep Throat so it's taking a bit longer.