Jump to content

2016 Republican Thread


southsider2k5
 Share

Recommended Posts

QUOTE (raBBit @ Oct 19, 2016 -> 01:14 AM)
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-roo...-with-new-video

 

The Hill reporting on the Clinton Campaign inciting violence and bussing voters into red states using shell companies.

Now does everybody agree both sides are disgraceful? The DNC incited trouble at Trump rallies? This is serious. People get get injured/killed.

 

http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/18/politics/pro...-trump-rallies/

Edited by greg775
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 2.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Hmmm... Chelsea can't find herself it says in this negative story about her. Me thinks she'll find herself the next 8 years and maybe, uh, run for high office?

 

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/10/18...n-concerns.html

 

Oh Hillary, your campaign is in a heap of trouble if anybody cares about the FBI protecting you. Letting her people get their stories straight, lol. FBI getting intimidated and run over by Clinton lawyers, lol. As if the FBI doesn't have power. It doesn't when it comes to protecting all the Clintons.

 

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/o...over-help-hill/

Edited by greg775
Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.yahoo.com/news/what-hillary-cli...-193545234.html

 

Would love to hear any Republican (and/or Greg) respond to what's being reported and what it is that you actually find so offensive...this actually sounds a lot like something John McCain, Mitt Romney or Jeb Bush would say. Pretty centrist.

 

 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/inappropriate-an...-204047397.html

 

Likewise, read the paragraph 3rd from the bottom. Do you really believe this, and you can maintain a straight face when nodding your head?

 

It's called damage control. One thing's for sure, though, Ivanka's brand is selling well still. That might be the ONLY positive to come out of this entire election cycle for the Trump family.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 19, 2016 -> 06:22 AM)
96% of all donatations made by journalists have going to Hillary Clinton.

 

https://www.publicintegrity.org/2016/10/17/...n-campaign-cash

 

What about media corporations/conglomerates? Mark Burnett, etc.? Btw, that amount is still not anywhere close if you add them all together to Adelson and the Ricketts Family.

 

Plus, can you imagine many top female executives being on record as donating to Trump? Wouldn't exactly help their businesses in the future...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (raBBit @ Oct 18, 2016 -> 08:14 PM)
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-roo...-with-new-video

 

The Hill reporting on the Clinton Campaign inciting violence and bussing voters into red states using shell companies.

Anyone who thought scumbags only existed in Trump's campaign were kidding themselves.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Oct 19, 2016 -> 07:43 AM)
What about media corporations/conglomerates? Mark Burnett, etc.? Btw, that amount is still not anywhere close if you add them all together to Adelson and the Ricketts Family.

 

Plus, can you imagine many top female executives being on record as donating to Trump? Wouldn't exactly help their businesses in the future...

 

What a perfect sentence to finish with as it has been proven over and over again, that donating to Clinton CAN buy influence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (raBBit @ Oct 19, 2016 -> 09:05 AM)
I can't even name one disagraced official in Trump's Campaign. Clinton's Campaign officials have been dropping every month.

 

The guy who had to resign last night, Bob Creamer, is a felon who has met with the POTUS over 200 times at the WH this year.

Paul Manafort?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Oct 19, 2016 -> 09:16 AM)
Journalists more likely to donate to candidate that isn't talking about altering libel laws to sue them.

Historically what had this stat looked like? Say without Trump running? This number seems staggering.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Oct 19, 2016 -> 11:18 AM)
Historically what had this stat looked like? Say without Trump running? This number seems staggering.

 

I'd imagine it would be much closer, but still lean liberal.

 

But in this case - look at the papers endorsements. When a candidate mocks reporters, talks about wanting to sue them and encourages his supporters to be violent/aggressive to reporters, they aren't likely to donate to him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Oct 19, 2016 -> 11:18 AM)
Historically what had this stat looked like? Say without Trump running? This number seems staggering.

 

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/19113485/ns/poli...y/#.WAee4fkrKUk

 

This is the best I can find.

 

Msnbc.com identified 143 journalists who made political contributions from 2004 through the start of the 2008 campaign, according to the public records of the Federal Election Commission. Most of the newsroom checkbooks leaned to the left: 125 journalists gave to Democrats and liberal causes. Only 16 gave to Republicans. Two gave to both parties.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (raBBit @ Oct 19, 2016 -> 11:05 AM)
I can't even name one disagraced official in Trump's Campaign. Clinton's Campaign officials have been dropping every month.

 

The guy who had to resign last night, Bob Creamer, is a felon who has met with the POTUS over 200 times at the WH this year.

 

Seriously? To wit...

 

QUOTE (CrimsonWeltall @ Oct 19, 2016 -> 11:14 AM)
Lewandowski? Manafort? Ailes?

 

Hilariously in those cases, guys were added to campaigns AFTER the did awful things.

 

Also, this...

 

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Oct 19, 2016 -> 11:08 AM)
The people who resigned worked for independent PACs, not the Clinton campaign itself.

 

And in the end, there will be scummies all over in both parties. That's the point, really.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (raBBit @ Oct 19, 2016 -> 01:00 PM)
All of these people were fired or had to resign from their position within Trump's campaign?

 

I only pay attention to HRC's campaign just to get insight on the next administration. Not sure I can't name someone in Trump's Campaign other than his sons.

Bannon? I think that should tell you all you need to know what type of people Trump would hire.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (raBBit @ Oct 19, 2016 -> 07:02 PM)
"What difference does it make" if someone works for a PAC or for the Clinton's directly. They're doing dirty work at the behest of the Clinton Campaign. Saying anything else is a cop out.

 

It makes a world of difference whether or not Hillary Clinton approved, or knew of, the alleged actions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (raBBit @ Oct 19, 2016 -> 01:00 PM)
All of these people were fired or had to resign from their position within Trump's campaign?

 

I only pay attention to HRC's campaign just to get insight on the next administration. Not sure I can't name someone in Trump's Campaign other than his sons.

 

Then why should your opinion be taken seriously?

 

Its the equivalent of saying "Sammy Sosa has the most home runs ever" and when someone says "Babe Ruth, Hank Aaron" you respond "Oh I only pay attention to the Cubs."

Edited by Soxbadger
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (CrimsonWeltall @ Oct 19, 2016 -> 01:06 PM)
It makes a world of difference whether or not Hillary Clinton approved, or knew of, the alleged actions.

To be fair I'd be judging the republicans a lot if something like this came out against them, I'd hold all GOP leadership and the candidate responsible, just like Hillary and the DNC leadership should be held accountable for having people like Foval in influential roles. No party will ever be perfect but these parties need to be held accountable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He works for an independent PAC that, legally, the official Clinton campaign cannot coordinate with or direct. I'm not sure if the official parties can communicate with the PACs, but they are not part of the same apparatus and any one of us could start up a PAC tomorrow in some candidate's name and the campaign and official parties can't really do anything to stop it other than to disavow and say they aren't involved and don't support the views/actions etc.

 

There is a lot of wink-wink, nudge-nudge coordination between campaigns and PACs, but directly commenting on personnel would be an obvious step over the line.

Edited by StrangeSox
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Oct 19, 2016 -> 01:18 PM)
To be fair I'd be judging the republicans a lot if something like this came out against them, I'd hold all GOP leadership and the candidate responsible, just like Hillary and the DNC leadership should be held accountable for having people like Foval in influential roles. No party will ever be perfect but these parties need to be held accountable.

 

I mean its fair to tacitly hold them responsible, but I believe the law currently makes it illegal for either party to directly work with these PACs.

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/super-...4b045bf3def0273

 

So the problem is that if Hillary/Trump tell a Pac to stop something, they could be theoretically in violation of the law. Which is pretty stupid. There needs to be some sort of meaningful campaign finance regulations, but the problem is incumbents dont really want to give up their advantages. This is a problem for both sides.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...