• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

Let's Face It, Clinton is Going to Win

T.G.G. Moogly

Traditional Atheist
Joined
Mar 18, 2001
Messages
11,400
Location
PA USA
Basic Beliefs
egalitarian
I mean, yes, it's close now but there is no way Trumpty Dumpty is going to be elected. I don't care how many women wear his shirt when they're coming out of their churches.

Hillary isn't anyone's number one, but she's going to beat heir Donald. Of that much I am certain.
 
If Trump wins he wins based mainly on the votes of white males.

Obviously the group with the lowest intelligence in the US.
 
I mean, yes, it's close now but there is no way Trumpty Dumpty is going to be elected. I don't care how many women wear his shirt when they're coming out of their churches.
For some reason, this sentence made me imagine a weird Trump worshipping church where women go in, something unspeakable happens and they come out wearing nothing but Donald Trump's shirt.
 
Yeah, Hillary is going to win. Trump is melting down. He should be talking policy, but is in a pissing match with a former Ms. America instead. He's flirting with making Bill Clinton's sexual escapades a central point of his campaign. How well did that work out for Newt and the GOP long ago?

He's a grotesque fool, lacking in expertise, competence and gravitas. All she has to do is let Trump be Trump and get on with her ground game. Bernie is now on the campaign trail, trying to energize his supporters to vote for Clinton. That will help.
 
I mean, yes, it's close now but there is no way Trumpty Dumpty is going to be elected. I don't care how many women wear his shirt when they're coming out of their churches.
For some reason, this sentence made me imagine a weird Trump worshipping church where women go in, something unspeakable happens and they come out wearing nothing but Donald Trump's shirt.

wk62xv3.gif
 
Yeah, Hillary is going to win. Trump is melting down. He should be talking policy, but is in a pissing match with a former Ms. America instead. He's flirting with making Bill Clinton's sexual escapades a central point of his campaign. How well did that work out for Newt and the GOP long ago?

He's a grotesque fool, lacking in expertise, competence and gravitas. All she has to do is let Trump be Trump and get on with her ground game. Bernie is now on the campaign trail, trying to energize his supporters to vote for Clinton. That will help.

I don't think any of the main candidates seem to be talking about issues affecting the nation. The electorate will have to choose the one they least dislike or vote for an alternative party. Such parties seem to be doing better nowadays. A system of proportional representation to replace the current one means there could be minority candidates elected.
 
Ya, Trump had momentum going into the debate but he blew it and there's really nothing he can do in the next month to build his numbers. Clinton has a superior ground game and the protest vote to third parties is going to drop at least a percentage point or two, so it's done.
 
I mean, yes, it's close now but there is no way Trumpty Dumpty is going to be elected. I don't care how many women wear his shirt when they're coming out of their churches.
For some reason, this sentence made me imagine a weird Trump worshipping church where women go in, something unspeakable happens and they come out wearing nothing but Donald Trump's shirt.

Scary.
 
I mean, yes, it's close now but there is no way Trumpty Dumpty is going to be elected. I don't care how many women wear his shirt when they're coming out of their churches.

Hillary isn't anyone's number one, but she's going to beat heir Donald. Of that much I am certain.

Sorry Joe, but I think that this is dramatically overstating HRC's chances. I'm sorry to say but scared white older people are far more motivated to vote. Yes democrats outnumber republicans. But reps make their vote count. Far more people on the left will either vote third party or will stay home than right wingers. If HRC doesn't have at least a 5 percent lead in the popular vote the night before the election Trump will win.
 
I don't think any of the main candidates seem to be talking about issues affecting the nation.

What? What rallies are _you_ watching. Clinton talks about policy All. The. Time.
How could you miss this?


More unfactual "both sides are just as bad" untruths. (more colloquially known as lies, for the record)
 
If Trump wins he wins based mainly on the votes of white males.

Obviously the group with the lowest intelligence in the US.
Isn't that racist? And no, whites aren't the most socio-economically disadvantaged group in the US, so why you would say that whites is not just the group but obviously the group with the lowest intelligence in the US is a bit odd, so (again) isn't that (and well, that too) racist?
 
Yeah, Hillary is going to win. Trump is melting down. He should be talking policy, but is in a pissing match with a former Ms. America instead. He's flirting with making Bill Clinton's sexual escapades a central point of his campaign. How well did that work out for Newt and the GOP long ago?

He's a grotesque fool, lacking in expertise, competence and gravitas. All she has to do is let Trump be Trump and get on with her ground game. Bernie is now on the campaign trail, trying to energize his supporters to vote for Clinton. That will help.

I don't think any of the main candidates seem to be talking about issues affecting the nation. The electorate will have to choose the one they least dislike or vote for an alternative party. Such parties seem to be doing better nowadays. A system of proportional representation to replace the current one means there could be minority candidates elected.


She has been doing exactly that, but the MSM prefers to headline Trump's latest outrage and E-mail crap, not giving much room for anything else to get through the noise.
 
If Trump wins he wins based mainly on the votes of white males.

Obviously the group with the lowest intelligence in the US.
Isn't that racist? And no, whites aren't the most socio-economically disadvantaged group in the US, so why you would say that whites is not just the group but obviously the group with the lowest intelligence in the US is a bit odd, so (again) isn't that (and well, that too) racist?
I would prefer to use the word stupid rather than intelligent because intelligent doesn't really mean anything.
 
If Trump wins he wins based mainly on the votes of white males.

Obviously the group with the lowest intelligence in the US.
Isn't that racist? And no, whites aren't the most socio-economically disadvantaged group in the US, so why you would say that whites is not just the group but obviously the group with the lowest intelligence in the US is a bit odd, so (again) isn't that (and well, that too) racist?

If you want to get all butt-hurt about being targeted by a racist comment, let's simply say "the disenfranchised". You know - the people Trump promises to enrich with his re-fried trickle-down nonsense. I don't call them stupid necessarily; many are simply blinded by an overwhelming desire for Trump's hollow promises to come true. Most know somewhere in the dark recesses of their brains that that's not going to happen, but would rather lash out with a protest vote than put up with any more of the status quo. Ignorance plays a large part, as those people are suckers for the demonizing blame game perpetrated upon them by the very people who actually ran off with their money, and are now planning an even bigger heist. But the rippers are not an easily identifiable group, as are "Mexicans" or "Islamists", so it is very easy to keep the marks distracted from the thievery going on right under their noses. Call each other "geniuses" for stealing from taxpayers (yes, avoiding taxes is stealing even if it is somehow legal due to having codes written to permit it by bribing legislators, as Trump brags about having done), and keep telling them that refugees are blowing up their churches (not a single refugee has been implicated in terrorism in the US), Mexicans raping their daughters etc., when in fact they are themselves doing all of those things on a scale that makes ISIS look like a west-side third rate gang operation.

So, to answer the question - NO. It's not racist.
 
Real Clear Politics shows Clinton ahead by 4.0% in a 4 way race. Trump is trending down. Wonder why? Huffington Polls says the same. Come on Donald! Say something stupid and grating again, Trump!

538 points out in 2012, Obama beat Romney by 3.9%. Clinton has gained a lot post debate.
 
I hope to God Mrs Clinton does win, but people are in a weird mental state generally just now, witness Brexit. Trump has done you huge harm already, unfortunately.
 
I hope to God Mrs Clinton does win, but people are in a weird mental state generally just now, witness Brexit. Trump has done you huge harm already, unfortunately.
Trump is selling the message that you have the right to get something for nothing, and as much as you want. Lots of not-so-smart people want that and want to believe that. When the prosperity genie gets out of the bottle it's hard to stuff it back in.
 
I don't think any of the main candidates seem to be talking about issues affecting the nation. The electorate will have to choose the one they least dislike or vote for an alternative party. Such parties seem to be doing better nowadays. A system of proportional representation to replace the current one means there could be minority candidates elected.


She has been doing exactly that, but the MSM prefers to headline Trump's latest outrage and E-mail crap, not giving much room for anything else to get through the noise.

She had an entire debate to present her content.

Yet she offered up nothing.

You can't blame the media for everything.
 
She has been doing exactly that, but the MSM prefers to headline Trump's latest outrage and E-mail crap, not giving much room for anything else to get through the noise.

She had an entire debate to present her content.

Yet she offered up nothing.

You can't blame the media for everything.

“Beginning with you, Secretary Clinton, why are you a better choice than your opponent to create the kinds of jobs that will put more money into the pockets of American works?”

CLINTON: Well, thank you, Lester, and thanks to Hofstra for hosting us.

The central question in this election is really what kind of country we want to be and what kind of future we'll build together. Today is my granddaughter's second birthday, so I think about this a lot. First, we have to build an economy that works for everyone, not just those at the top. That means we need new jobs, good jobs, with rising incomes.

I want us to invest in you. I want us to invest in your future. That means jobs in infrastructure, in advanced manufacturing, innovation and technology, clean, renewable energy, and small business, because most of the new jobs will come from small business. We also have to make the economy fairer. That starts with raising the national minimum wage and also guarantee, finally, equal pay for women's work.

CLINTON: I also want to see more companies do profit-sharing. If you help create the profits, you should be able to share in them, not just the executives at the top.

And I want us to do more to support people who are struggling to balance family and work. I've heard from so many of you about the difficult choices you face and the stresses that you're under. So let's have paid family leave, earned sick days. Let's be sure we have affordable child care and debt-free college.

How are we going to do it? We're going to do it by having the wealthy pay their fair share and close the corporate loopholes.

“Secretary Clinton, you’re calling for a tax increase on the wealthiest Americans. I’d like you to further defend that. “You have two minutes of the same question to defend tax increases on the wealthiest Americans, Secretary Clinton.”

CLINTON: I don't think top-down works in America. I think building the middle class, investing in the middle class, making college debt-free so more young people can get their education, helping people refinance their -- their debt from college at a lower rate. Those are the kinds of things that will really boost the economy. Broad-based, inclusive growth is what we need in America, not more advantages for people at the very top.

“The share of Americans who say race relations are bad in this country is the highest it’s been in decades, much of it amplified by shootings of African-Americans by police, as we’ve seen recently in Charlotte and Tulsa. Race has been a big issue in this campaign, and one of you is going to have to bridge a very wide and bitter gap. So how do you heal the divide? Secretary Clinton, you get two minutes on this.”

CLINTON: Well, you're right. Race remains a significant challenge in our country. Unfortunately, race still determines too much, often determines where people live, determines what kind of education in their public schools they can get, and, yes, it determines how they're treated in the criminal justice system. We've just seen those two tragic examples in both Tulsa and Charlotte.

And we've got to do several things at the same time. We have to restore trust between communities and the police. We have to work to make sure that our police are using the best training, the best techniques, that they're well prepared to use force only when necessary. Everyone should be respected by the law, and everyone should respect the law.

CLINTON: Right now, that's not the case in a lot of our neighborhoods. So I have, ever since the first day of my campaign, called for criminal justice reform. I've laid out a platform that I think would begin to remedy some of the problems we have in the criminal justice system.

But we also have to recognize, in addition to the challenges that we face with policing, there are so many good, brave police officers who equally want reform. So we have to bring communities together in order to begin working on that as a mutual goal. And we've got to get guns out of the hands of people who should not have them.

The gun epidemic is the leading cause of death of young African- American men, more than the next nine causes put together. So we have to do two things, as I said. We have to restore trust. We have to work with the police. We have to make sure they respect the communities and the communities respect them. And we have to tackle the plague of gun violence, which is a big contributor to a lot of the problems that we're seeing today.

CLINTON: You know, the vibrancy of the black church, the black businesses that employ so many people, the opportunities that so many families are working to provide for their kids. There's a lot that we should be proud of and we should be supporting and lifting up.

But we do always have to make sure we keep people safe. There are the right ways of doing it, and then there are ways that are ineffective. Stop-and-frisk was found to be unconstitutional and, in part, because it was ineffective. It did not do what it needed to do.

Now, I believe in community policing. And, in fact, violent crime is one-half of what it was in 1991. Property crime is down 40 percent. We just don't want to see it creep back up. We've had 25 years of very good cooperation.

But there were some problems, some unintended consequences. Too many young African-American and Latino men ended up in jail for nonviolent offenses. And it's just a fact that if you're a young African-American man and you do the same thing as a young white man, you are more likely to be arrested, charged, convicted, and incarcerated. So we've got to address the systemic racism in our criminal justice system. We cannot just say law and order. We have to say -- we have to come forward with a plan that is going to divert people from the criminal justice system, deal with mandatory minimum sentences, which have put too many people away for too long for doing too little.

We need to have more second chance programs. I'm glad that we're ending private prisons in the federal system; I want to see them ended in the state system. You shouldn't have a profit motivation to fill prison cells with young Americans. So there are some positive ways we can work on this.

And I believe strongly that commonsense gun safety measures would assist us. Right now -- and this is something Donald has supported, along with the gun lobby -- right now, we've got too many military- style weapons on the streets. In a lot of places, our police are outgunned. We need comprehensive background checks, and we need to keep guns out of the hands of those who will do harm.

And we finally need to pass a prohibition on anyone who's on the terrorist watch list from being able to buy a gun in our country. If you're too dangerous to fly, you are too dangerous to buy a gun. So there are things we can do, and we ought to do it in a bipartisan way.

“Secretary Clinton, last week, you said we’ve got to do everything possible to improve policing, to go right at implicit bias. Do you believe that police are implicitly biased against black people?”

CLINTON: Lester, I think implicit bias is a problem for everyone, not just police. I think, unfortunately, too many of us in our great country jump to conclusions about each other. And therefore, I think we need all of us to be asking hard questions about, you know, why am I feeling this way?

But when it comes to policing, since it can have literally fatal consequences, I have said, in my first budget, we would put money into that budget to help us deal with implicit bias by retraining a lot of our police officers.

I've met with a group of very distinguished, experienced police chiefs a few weeks ago. They admit it's an issue. They've got a lot of concerns. Mental health is one of the biggest concerns, because now police are having to handle a lot of really difficult mental health problems on the street.

CLINTON: They want support, they want more training, they want more assistance. And I think the federal government could be in a position where we would offer and provide that.

CLINTON: New York -- New York has done an excellent job. And I give credit -- I give credit across the board going back two mayors, two police chiefs, because it has worked. And other communities need to come together to do what will work, as well.

Look, one murder is too many. But it is important that we learn about what has been effective. And not go to things that sound good that really did not have the kind of impact that we would want. Who disagrees with keeping neighborhoods safe?

But let's also add, no one should disagree about respecting the rights of young men who live in those neighborhoods. And so we need to do a better job of working, again, with the communities, faith communities, business communities, as well as the police to try to deal with this problem.

“Our next segment is called ‘Securing America.’ We want to start with a 21st century war happening every day in this country. Our institutions are under cyber attack, and our secrets are being stolen. So my question is, who’s behind it? And how do we fight it? Secretary Clinton, this answer goes to you.”

CLINTON: Well, I think cyber security, cyber warfare will be one of the biggest challenges facing the next president, because clearly we're facing at this point two different kinds of adversaries. There are the independent hacking groups that do it mostly for commercial reasons to try to steal information that they can use to make money.

But increasingly, we are seeing cyber attacks coming from states, organs of states. The most recent and troubling of these has been Russia. There's no doubt now that Russia has used cyber attacks against all kinds of organizations in our country, and I am deeply concerned about this.

I know Donald's very praiseworthy of Vladimir Putin, but Putin is playing a really...

(CROSSTALK)

CLINTON: ... tough, long game here. And one of the things he's done is to let loose cyber attackers to hack into government files, to hack into personal files, hack into the Democratic National Committee. And we recently have learned that, you know, that this is one of their preferred methods of trying to wreak havoc and collect information. We need to make it very clear -- whether it's Russia, China, Iran or anybody else -- the United States has much greater capacity. And we are not going to sit idly by and permit state actors to go after our information, our private-sector information or our public-sector information.

And we're going to have to make it clear that we don't want to use the kinds of tools that we have. We don't want to engage in a different kind of warfare. But we will defend the citizens of this country.

And the Russians need to understand that. I think they've been treating it as almost a probing, how far would we go, how much would we do.

CLINTON: Well, I think there are a number of issues that we should be addressing. I have put forth a plan to defeat ISIS. It does involve going after them online. I think we need to do much more with our tech companies to prevent ISIS and their operatives from being able to use the Internet to radicalize, even direct people in our country and Europe and elsewhere.

But we also have to intensify our air strikes against ISIS and eventually support our Arab and Kurdish partners to be able to actually take out ISIS in Raqqa, end their claim of being a Caliphate.

We're making progress. Our military is assisting in Iraq. And we're hoping that within the year we'll be able to push ISIS out of Iraq and then, you know, really squeeze them in Syria.

But we have to be cognizant of the fact that they've had foreign fighters coming to volunteer for them, foreign money, foreign weapons, so we have to make this the top priority.

And I would also do everything possible to take out their leadership. I was involved in a number of efforts to take out Al Qaida leadership when I was secretary of state, including, of course, taking out bin Laden. And I think we need to go after Baghdadi, as well, make that one of our organizing principles. Because we've got to defeat ISIS, and we've got to do everything we can to disrupt their propaganda efforts online.

CLINTON: But let's talk about the question you asked, Lester. The question you asked is, what do we do here in the United States? That's the most important part of this. How do we prevent attacks? How do we protect our people?

And I think we've got to have an intelligence surge, where we are looking for every scrap of information. I was so proud of law enforcement in New York, in Minnesota, in New Jersey. You know, they responded so quickly, so professionally to the attacks that occurred by Rahami. And they brought him down. And we may find out more information because he is still alive, which may prove to be an intelligence benefit.

So we've got to do everything we can to vacuum up intelligence from Europe, from the Middle East. That means we've got to work more closely with our allies, and that's something that Donald has been very dismissive of.

We're working with NATO, the longest military alliance in the history of the world, to really turn our attention to terrorism. We're working with our friends in the Middle East, many of which, as you know, are Muslim majority nations. Donald has consistently insulted Muslims abroad, Muslims at home, when we need to be cooperating with Muslim nations and with the American Muslim community.

They're on the front lines. They can provide information to us that we might not get anywhere else. They need to have close working cooperation with law enforcement in these communities, not be alienated and pushed away as some of Donald's rhetoric, unfortunately, has led to.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ton-presidential-debate-transcript-annotated/

I know that Trump's mugging and interruptions were a distraction, but are you suggesting that HRC did not answer the questions asked of her at the debate, or is your objection to the questions themselves?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom