TTLG|Thief|Bioshock|System Shock|Deus Ex|Mobile

View Poll Results: How long will Trump be President?

Voters
144. You may not vote on this poll
  • 1 Term (4 Years)

    26 18.06%
  • 2 Terms (8 Years)

    51 35.42%
  • 1st Term Impeachment/Assassination

    50 34.72%
  • 2nd Term Impeachment/Assassination

    4 2.78%
  • I don't know what's going on!

    13 9.03%
Page 20 of 558 FirstFirst ... 5101516171819202122232425303540455055606570120270520 ... LastLast
Results 476 to 500 of 13947

Thread: ✮✮✮ !Trump Dump! ✮✮✮

  1. #476
    LittleFlower
    Registered: Jul 2001
    Location: Netherlands
    Quote Originally Posted by dj_ivocha View Post
    Aren't there other, independent candidates one can vote for? Because if you don't like either of the "big" candidates, but vote for the one you dislike slightly less, then you are perpetuating the problem anyway, aren't you?
    Remember this ?
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ralph_...22_controversy
    In 2000, some democrat voters voted for Ralph Nader, in stead of Al Gore. If they wouldn't have done that (in Florida at least), Gore would have been president in 2001. Not GW Bush. I am 100% sure that Gore would not have invaded Iraq. The mess in the Middle East would have been smaller than it is now. IS would probably not have existed. There probably wouldn't be war in Syria.

    In other words, the people who voted for Ralph Nader in 2000, in stead of Gore, are responsible for the 84 deaths in Nice last week. Just kidding. How could they have known. But there is a line of causality here. Please don't let the same thing happen in 2016. Don't allow Trump to win, just because some disappointed democrats are sulking that Bernie isn't the Democratic candidate.

  2. #477
    Member
    Registered: Aug 2004
    I think that "perpetuating the problem" viewpoint involves a deeply delusional opinion on what "the problem" really is.

    The two party system is unintentionally baked into the constitution. That can be changed, at least theoretically, but that's not really the issue at hand; voting for a third party candidate over Clinton would push back progress on that front (and basically every other).
    Last edited by Pyrian; 23rd Jul 2016 at 17:04. Reason: Intervening post

  3. #478
    Moderator
    Registered: Jan 2003
    Location: NeoTokyo
    Quote Originally Posted by dj_ivocha View Post
    Aren't there other, independent candidates one can vote for? Because if you don't like either of the "big" candidates, but vote for the one you dislike slightly less, then you are perpetuating the problem anyway, aren't you?
    We have the Green Party's Jill Stein and the Libertarian Party's Gary Johnson. I was reading Johnson may even make the cut for the tv debates. I fully expect they're going to get as many votes as a third party has in a long while, although probably not as much as Perot in 1992 (who was pretty much like Trump before Trump, except under a third party and less ego & charisma.)

    GJ is the bigger of the two and attractive to both mainstream & alt Reps and Bernie Bros Dems, although to me he's always a bit bumbling like an over-excited new convert. (I don't trust the kind of religious zeal & dogma of Liberts.) And it doesn't help his, or either's, chance of winning that the Third Party vote is split.

    But it could be a big factor in taking votes away from a major candidate and flipping the election. Perot played a role in Bush I's loss to Clinton I. Until I see the polling, I'm not sure if Johnson would take more votes from Reps or Dems. In a normal election it's Reps, and I predict it here too. But Bernie Bros are a wildcard that may bolt.

  4. #479
    Moderator and Priest
    Registered: Mar 2002
    Location: Dinosaur Ladies of the Night
    Quote Originally Posted by demagogue View Post
    We have the Green Party's Jill Stein and the Libertarian Party's Gary Johnson.
    It's been a bit since I've read about this, so correct me if I'm wrong, but if we were to end up in a situation where Johnson manages to win a handful of states for the Libs, enough to keep either Trump or Clinton from reaching the necessary 270 electoral votes to gain the presidency, then those states become contested, and their votes are sent to the Senate to dole out between the two major parties.

    If I'm correct, then you could say that any vote for Johnson would indirectly be a vote for Trump, since his chances of winning the presidency, while considerably better than usual, would still be highly unlikely. Thus, any state that becomes contested will have their vote decided for them by our current sitting senate, which is majority Republican.

  5. #480
    Moderator
    Registered: Jan 2003
    Location: NeoTokyo
    It goes to the House of Reps, not the Senate, but the HOR is also Rep majority, so the punchline is the same.

    The catch is a Lib winning an entire state would mean he'd have to vote higher than both other candidates, which is unlikely except for a few little weirdo states like Vermont.

  6. #481
    Moderator and Priest
    Registered: Mar 2002
    Location: Dinosaur Ladies of the Night
    Going to the House makes more sense, now that I think about it.

    Under normal circumstances, I'd agree that the chances of a 3rd party winning a state are pretty slim. But, you know, sign of the times, zeitgeist, all that good stuff, we're far from what anyone would call normal circumstances. Our two candidates are so disliked, you could almost say they're both setting an historic precedence in terms of their unpopularity. Trump's an idiot loudmouth, Hillary comes across as being a moral shade of dark grey. I would not be at all surprised if Johnson ends up carrying a couple of states for himself come this November.

  7. #482
    Chakat sex pillow
    Registered: Sep 2006
    Location: not here
    If that happens, the parallels with the last season of Veep would be... uncomfortable.

  8. #483
    Member
    Registered: Mar 2001
    Location: Melbourne, Australia
    Quote Originally Posted by Pyrian View Post
    This argument baffles me. "He's a bonkers racist, but at least he seems like a genuine bonkers racist!" Okay, so we genuinely don't want him anywhere near the position of Commander and Chief, right?

    To me, Hillary Clinton is way more genuine. She's obviously painfully uncomfortable with the daily activities of running for office. How do you get more genuine than that? Being a better actor does not make Trump (or anybody else) "genuine" at all.
    Trump says what he thinks/believes and doesn't care who he offends. Hillary in-comparison like most politicians of present day, just says what her party tells her to. She's also been on record standing for the vast majority of what Trump now stands for many years prior (the wall etc).

  9. #484
    Member
    Registered: Oct 2002
    Location: London / London / London
    Quote Originally Posted by icemann View Post
    Trump says what he thinks/believes and doesn't care who he offends.
    Which sounds admirable, except he says horrible, derogatory and often quite unbelievably stupid things. It's not a plus point.

  10. #485
    Member
    Registered: Apr 2001
    Location: Switzerland
    Exactly. If he means what he says, he's undoubtedly stupid and ignorant. Alternatively, he tells his audience what they want to hear, which would make him smart but a manipulative hypocrite. Neither option is one I consider particularly desirable.

  11. #486
    Member
    Registered: Jan 2005
    So much respect for the democratic process in this thread. It bodes well for the future. With the "leftist" Hillary, I'm sure we can expect a few more illegal wars (and a few millions more civilian casualties). At least she hasn't said anything "derogatory" towards women, gays or "migrants", that's what matters. In fact she loves "migrants" so much, she's gonna create some more... by destroying their country. All in the name of freedom and democracy of course.

  12. #487
    Moderator
    Registered: Jan 2003
    Location: NeoTokyo
    America is in an isolationist phase, and she was Sec of State under Obama overseeing it. Nobody in the US wants to intervene in any Middle Eastern country short of limited bombing of ISIS oil wells and the like.

    If a half million Syrian casualties and 10 million displaced don't move the US to act, it's hard to imagine any scenario that could. The one wildcard, a nuclear armed Iran, is the one thing that's been taken out of the equation, so the East is free to eat itself alive without US involvement.

  13. #488
    Member
    Registered: Jan 2005
    Lol isolationist phase? No intervention in the middle east? Limited bombing of ISIS? Are you stupid or just plain crazy? The US has been on the side of ISIS since the beginning, trying to destabilize and overthrow a perfectly legitimate government in a sovereign nation. The US is responsible for the half a million Syrian casualties and 10 million displaced you mentioned. Along with a few more millions dead in Libya, Irak, and Afghanistan. If there's a wildcard in all this it's the US, not Iran, who need the nuclear bomb asap to stop US meddling in the Middle East. I wonder how you'd feel if suddenly the US was declared a dictatorship, invaded, its government overthrown and half its population annihilated. I assume you'd welcome your liberators with open arms, and would happily go on to live the miserable life of a refugee in the Calais Jungle.

  14. #489
    Member
    Registered: Oct 2002
    Location: London / London / London
    Manwe, you're very aggressive. And maybe you're not sure how quotation marks work?

  15. #490
    More great news for the Democrat party: the emails leaked from the DNC offer hard proof that they were both attempting to rig the game against Bernie Sanders, and that the DNC collaborates with major media outlets to make sure the desired narrative gets published.

    http://observer.com/2016/07/wikileak...ned-democracy/

    The most to-the-point summary comes from the blog that every Wall Street type reads, but will never admit to reading:

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-0...edia-collusion

  16. #491
    Quote Originally Posted by demagogue View Post
    America is in an isolationist phase, and she was Sec of State under Obama overseeing it. Nobody in the US wants to intervene in any Middle Eastern country short of limited bombing of ISIS oil wells and the like.

    If a half million Syrian casualties and 10 million displaced don't move the US to act, it's hard to imagine any scenario that could. The one wildcard, a nuclear armed Iran, is the one thing that's been taken out of the equation, so the East is free to eat itself alive without US involvement.
    Quick question. Are you merely misinformed or actively delusional?


    Here are a few things that the US did while she was secretary of state.

    *Ran a drone bombing campaign in Pakistan that deliberately targeted first responders, weddings, funerals, etc.

    *Ran a bombing campaign in Yemen that turned the country from neutral into a Jihadist stronghold

    *Funded islamist uprisings throughout the Middle East including successful ones in Libya and Egypt....and yes, we did have boots on the grounds in those places supporting the Islamic revolutions. I saw the live maps with US-colored unit blips with my own eyes.

    *Interfered with events in Ukraine trying to maintain a US friendly puppet government there.

    *Funded a variety of "moderate" rebel groups in Syria that just happened to have connections to Al-Quaeda, including deployments of SF ODA's and shipments of weapons from Libya, specifically Ambassador Stevens was involved in running an operation from Benghazi(Yes, that is what they're actually trying to cover up).




    So, far from having an "isolationist phase", Hillary and Obama have managed the remarkable feat of bathing the Middle East in more blood than George Bush did.

    Exactly. If he means what he says, he's undoubtedly stupid and ignorant. Alternatively, he tells his audience what they want to hear, which would make him smart but a manipulative hypocrite. Neither option is one I consider particularly desirable.
    None of the above. He's extremely skilled at using PR tactics to guide a narrative and discussion onto topics he wants covered.

    Read what Scott Adams has to say on the matter. Trump is using identity tactics and fear-based tactics to galvanize support.

    Basically, Trump sounds to you what the Democrat party sounds like to anyone living in what elitist assholes call "flyover country".


    I'm going to go with "incompetent cronyism" on a level even more extreme than Dubya's. I've never been able to shake the suspicion that Dubya's administration wasn't so much incompetent as simply ideologically opposed to effective governance. Trump may bring in the real deal - people not even remotely qualified for their positions, just like president Trump
    That's rich given that Hillary promoted a freaking Hedge Fund trader to the board of a top secret nuclear weapons program.

    Plus there's everything in here:

    Last edited by Tony_Tarantula; 24th Jul 2016 at 12:56.

  17. #492
    Moderator and Priest
    Registered: Mar 2002
    Location: Dinosaur Ladies of the Night
    Quote Originally Posted by Tony_Tarantula View Post
    The most to-the-point summary comes from the blog that every Wall Street type reads, but will never admit to reading
    It's the secret Wall Street insiders don't want you to know about!

  18. #493
    Quote Originally Posted by faetal View Post
    I define Conservative as being primarily acting in the interests of the established order of the wealth-power feedback loop.
    The actual functioning of your two parties doesn't seem to differ greatly, they just seem to have different PR and maybe legislate differently on a few social issues so long as they don't touch the aforementioned loop too badly.

    I mean, you can call Obama liberal, but his pushing of the TTIP and extensive use of the highly controversial drone program are far from what most of the world would term liberal.

    It wasn't too far off in the UK either prior to Corbyn's coup of the Labour party. You mostly seemed to have a choice between cuddly psychopaths and asshole psychopaths.

    Also apologize for jumping around but just saw this now.

    That's...completely incorrect. The definition is not particularly precise and depends on which politicial scholar you ask, but the general theme is that "conservative" nowadays want a return to the classical liberalism that dominated previous eras. Basically they're big on checks and balances, a republic style of representative government, and a somewhat isolationist foreign policy. The big disagreement between different factions is what role religion plays in society, and how to allocate powers between different levels of government.

    Furthermore it's ironic that your criticism is that they "support the established order", given that the policies that you defend are invariably those backed by the elite. The Koch brothers and most multi-national corporations heavily support open borders, the movement of "refugees" to europe is backed by George Soros, the LGBT movement is funded by fortune 500 hundred companies to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars, the "Obamacare" act in the United States was pushed by and largely written by insurance and pharma corporations, and every politician that we've discussed that you defend is bankrolled by Wall Street often to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars (e.g. Hillary Clinton).

    You're operating off an outdated paradigm that now exists only in academic theory. The establishment school of thought is a bizarre combination of the worst aspects of socialism and capitalism that's most accurately referred to as Globalism: the idea that national identities and boundaries must be broken down for the benefit of multinational corporations and elites.

  19. #494
    Quote Originally Posted by Renzatic View Post
    It's the secret Wall Street insiders don't want you to know about!
    Nothing quite so moronic as that. It's kind of like reading the Young Turks if you work at the RNC. There might be some good info there but you sure as hell aren't going to be caught reading it lest people think that "you're not one of us".

    Also I know a lot of these people mostly mid level bankers(the ones who have had a promotion or two). A LOT of them mention zero hedge stories in conversation but nobody ever mentions anything they publish in official correspondence or over email.

  20. #495
    Member
    Registered: Oct 2002
    Location: London / London / London
    The LGBT "movement" (? Do you mean the existence of non-heteros?) is a corporate conspiracy? Please just shut UP, Tony! Where do you get this bullshit? And why do you not only believe it but actually sound proud that you believe it?!

  21. #496
    Member
    Registered: Sep 2000
    Location: Near Brisbane, Australia
    You know Tony, every so often I actually read one of the links you post. It's always a waste of time, and today was no exception. I read the observer link above: would you mind quoting the parts of that article which you found so shocking?

    (I mean, I'm not saying that I love politics as normal, but there was a remarkable disconnect between the outrage in the observer article and the humdrum day-to-day reality it described.)

  22. #497
    Moderator and Priest
    Registered: Mar 2002
    Location: Dinosaur Ladies of the Night
    Quote Originally Posted by Vivian View Post
    The LGBT "movement" (? Do you mean the existence of non-heteros?) is a corporate conspiracy? Please just shut UP, Tony! Where do you get this bullshit? And why do you not only believe it but actually sound proud that you believe it?!
    It's a well known fact that LGBT movement is but one part of a much larger scheme to control society by disrupting the traditional family structure, producing an entire generation of pliant children who will be more easily funneled onto welfare, making them perpetually subservient to The Government, thus allowing The Establishment to more easily engineer a market shift from laissez-faire capitalism to heavily regulated Marxist socialism.

    ...hell, I thought that was common knowledge. That's what the Democrats did to the negro, who now have a deeply engrained racial bias towards communism due to their government enforced enslavement to social safety nets.

    George Soros. George Soros. George Soros.

  23. #498
    Member
    Registered: Jun 2002
    Location: Pacific Northwest
    Ex-President and possible First Guy Bill Clinton's DNC speech, complete with cues, has already been leaked! Unlike Melania Trump's English 101 copypasta disaster, Bill's speech is actually both inspiring and wholly original! Take a look:

    [clear throat, adopt disarming smile that will be maintained for duration of speech]

    Ahem. My fellow Americans. The time has come to end this divisiveness and come together in love and charity. Hillary, people of America, this is for you.

    [wait three seconds for dramatic effect]

    We're no strangers to love
    You know the rules and so do I
    A full commitment's what I'm thinking of
    You wouldn't get this from any other guy
    I just wanna tell you how I'm feeling
    Gotta make you understand

    [slowly raise both hands as if to encompass entire audience in a giant patriotic hug while singing the next paragraph and dancing in place]

    Never gonna give you up
    Never gonna let you down
    Never gonna run around and desert you
    Never gonna make you cry
    Never gonna say goodbye
    Never gonna tell a lie and hurt you

    We've known each other for so long
    Your heart's been aching but
    You're too shy to say it
    [smile and wink at random audience member]
    Inside we both know what's been going on
    We know the game and we're gonna play it
    And if you ask me how I'm feeling
    Don't tell me you're too blind to see

    [start gyrating hips rhythmically]

    Never gonna give you up
    Never gonna let you down
    Never gonna run around and desert you
    Never gonna make you cry
    Never gonna say goodbye
    Never gonna tell a lie and hurt you

    [look directly into all major media outlet cameras with sincerity while continuing gyrations]

    Never gonna give you up
    Never gonna let you down
    Never gonna run around and desert you
    Never gonna make you cry
    Never gonna say goodbye
    Never gonna tell a lie and hurt you

    [point at random audience member (not the same one as last time) and wink]

    Never gonna give, never gonna give
    (Give you up)
    (Ooh)
    Never gonna give, never gonna give
    (Give you up)

    [stand still, wait for applause to subside]

    Thank you for giving me this chance again America, Hillary and all you new Democratic Party interns. (do NOT wink at this point) The best is yet to come.
    Oh man, Trump is going to be red(der) with envy! How can they possibly beat this?

  24. #499
    So, what was this about DNC's being pure, morally superior anti-racists?



    Good grief....these people are like the preacher that does lines of coke off a hooker's ass right before putting on his robes to lecture everyone else about sin.

    It's a well known fact that LGBT movement is but one part of a much larger scheme to control society by disrupting the traditional family structure, producing an entire generation of pliant children who will be more easily funneled onto welfare, making them perpetually subservient to The Government, thus allowing The Establishment to more easily engineer a market shift from laissez-faire capitalism to heavily regulated Marxist socialism.

    ...hell, I thought that was common knowledge. That's what the Democrats did to the negro, who now have a deeply engrained racial bias towards communism due to their government enforced enslavement to social safety nets.

    George Soros. George Soros. George Soros.
    Irrelevant. Any conspiracies out there, and even whether or not they're true has no bearing on the point I'm making: that faetal's positions are, far from being "anti-establishment", the exact same ones that the establishment funds and advocates for.

    The LGBT "movement" (? Do you mean the existence of non-heteros?) is a corporate conspiracy? Please just shut UP, Tony! Where do you get this bullshit? And why do you not only believe it but actually sound proud that you believe it?!
    Again, where the fuck did I say conspiracy?

    If the "Elites" are paying hundreds of millions of dollars to support it, then by definition it is establishment position. "Conspiracies" are a different(and stupid) discussion.


    ****

    Now HERE is the kicker. I just pulled the same mindfuck on you all that is being pulled on you every day.

    Take a look at all the other things I mentioned. Which one do you think has a bigger impact on society? Wall Street buying economic policy? Israel buying US foreign policy? Large agricultural companies buying immigration policy? Or which bathroom LGBT people use in North Carolina?

    Yet all of that...and you are content to completely ignore how you're being fucked up the asshole with a footlong barbed strapon, simply becaused someone mentioned gays. In fact I didn't say anything remotely controversial: I just stated a well known fact that the Fortune 500 spend a lot of money supporting LGBT activism.

    Like this:



    See how that works? Deutsche Bank is engaged in all kinds of shady shit that directly lowers your quality of life (and, potentially, is about to crash Europe's entire economy), but now that doesn't matter because they support LGBT rights! That makes them good people!
    Last edited by Tony_Tarantula; 25th Jul 2016 at 15:11.

  25. #500
    Also here is what has been found in the emails. Nothing that is individually "holy shit" so far but it's more than enough to blow up the idea that the Democratic party has the right to ride the moral high horse they're currently on. Half of what they're claiming to be outraged about Trump doing (like insulting Megyn Kelly) they're doing themselves.


    DNC member killing horses for insurance money.
    https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/578
    DNC telling each other, "I love you too. no homo."
    https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/425
    DNC requesting a pull an MSNBC commentary segment.
    https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/6107
    DNC controlling the narrative with time released stories.
    https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/12450
    DNC conspiring to create false Trump information and release with Reuters.
    https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/7102
    DNC Hillary supporters infiltrated Sanders campaign.
    https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/4776
    DNC members going to complain to Morning Joe producers about his mentioning of a "rigged system."
    https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/8806
    DNC discussing their relationship with NBC/MSNBC/CNN and how to get better treatment.
    https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/13762
    Super PAC paying young voters to push back online Sanders supporters. Paid shills.
    https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/8351
    DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz having an off the record meeting in MSNBC President Phil Griffin's office.
    https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/8867
    DNC being messed with by the Washington Examiner.
    https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/5304
    DNC discussing Hillary's policies as unfeasible.
    https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/519
    $200k for a private dinner with Hillary.
    https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/17287
    Offering to send interns out to fake a protest against the RNC.
    https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/13366
    Faking outrage and pasting in a video later.
    https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/7102
    A mole working inside of the Sanders campaign.
    https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/7793
    Bringing up Sanders religion to scare the southern voters.
    https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/11508
    Possible money laundering by moving money back and forth to bypass legal limits.
    https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/6230
    Politico writer sending his stories to the DNC before he sends them to his editor.
    https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/10808
    DNC feeding CNN the questions they want to be asked in interviews.
    https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/4077
    Creating a fake job ad for a Trump business to paint him as a sexist.
    https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/12803
    Hillary funding 2 million dollars in a cooridanted campaign in battleground states to win back the Senate.
    https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/7784
    DNC is upset that their "allies" didn't send in protestors so they sent out interns.
    https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/13366
    "Clinton Foundation quid-pro-quo worries are lingering, will be exploited in general."
    https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/8351
    $50,000 - Lawrence Benenson.
    https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/14700
    Daily Fundraising Report for the DNC.
    https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/2875
    Content & Social Strategy Discussion.
    https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/7512
    Re: BuzzFeed and DNC connection.
    https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/10933
    Draft linking news articles about trump to use as negative press.
    https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/7586
    Fwd: State Dinner Countdown.
    https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/1901
    Some chick is angry she hasn't been given more stuff from the Obama administration...might be interesting to follow up.
    Re: State Dinner Countdown.
    https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/2946
    Tim O'Brien: Trump's Fixation on Inflating his Net Worth is a Cause for Concern.
    https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/4496
    RE: May Fundraising Numbers.
    https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/5615
    https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/7720
    Hillary for America Raised $26.4 Million in April, Began May with More than $30 Million Cash on Hand.
    https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/13986
    Re: For approval: Trump supporter graphics.https://www.wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/788
    Press talking points, states Hillary is their candidate, dated May 5, 2016. More of a smoking gun than the ambiguous talk in the emails themselves.
    https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/fileid/5254/2728
    Consultant calling megyn kelly a bimbo. Has PDF attached that says the same.
    https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/6087
    DNC trying to get away with violating the Hatch Act.
    https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/20148
    Democrats using interns to organize fake "protests."
    https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/13830
    RE: Action on DNC tomorrow (Immigration Raids).
    https://www.wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/9736
    SPREAD THIS
    Edit: "Here's one with an initial "we need to hide DWS" type strategy. https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/6634 " - added by /u/untildeath
    Edit2 added by: /u/snappopcrackle
    Here are some more:
    DNC HQ learned about the NV Dems letter about alleged Sanders Violence in NV by reading about it on AP " Regardless, we heard first about this from the AP. We can't get surprised with something like this." https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/12067
    DWS wants to release gif of Christie's wife giving eye roll, gets shot down "this is not the work we do" https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/4968
    Refers to Bernie as "the insurgency" https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/4861
    There is also one about sending a fruit basket to a DNC colleague in the hospital "make it a $50 one, only worked for us for a year"
    Also just for fun, search for Pablo, the guy is totally disruptive and pretty cool, and it is funny to read his career trajectory at the DNC and all the witchy remarks about him near the end by his colleagues
    Admitting to closing polling places in RI, govenor is "one of us" and we need to "cover ourselves"
    Kind of colluding on the Sanders NV violence narrative: ." Is it helpful for us to start putting out state party chairs who can talk about how peaceful their conventions are and that Nevada was an anomaly, or is that counterproductive? " "Lets Leave it alone"https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/13003
    "· Clinton campaign is a mess, they’re afraid of their own shadow and didn’t like that we engaged. I happen to think they’re wrong and it explains why they’re hobbling along unable to close it out." https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/8253
    Everything on the Hillary Victory Fund is super shady. Also they are coordinating with Hillary campaign to get the same story for a politico story https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/7343
    Ragging on a ton of LGBT Donors and hosts, one ex: "Host Bill Jacobs. This event turned out to be a vanity project for Bill Jacobs . However, this event also encouraged Bill to pledge 66,400." Search for LGBT Exit Memo -- it is an attchament, really juicy
    Search for the attachment Millenial Outreach to see how out of touch the DNC is with anyone under 50
    One nice thing: Politifact actual does what they say they do and are actually researching and reporting things unbiasedly to get at the truth
    DNC doesnt "have fully bilingual staff who can write in Spanish, and no budget for translations." Guess that is why Kaine is so needed https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/12735
    On a MSNBC story called " Bernie Sanders faces a ‘then what’ problem" DWS asks "This is a good story. Did we get them the info near the bottom?" Her Press Director responds "Yes, and Hilary sent part of that." https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/11712
    DNC doesnt use the word "leaders" because it makes them sound elitisthttps://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/9833
    Being on the platform drafting committee is different than the platformhttps://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/7899
    Making fun of local reporters "reporters seem to be thrilled to be at the Convention lmfaooooo" https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/7177

Page 20 of 558 FirstFirst ... 5101516171819202122232425303540455055606570120270520 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •