• Current Events & Politics
    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • Current Events & Politics Moderators: deficiT | tryptakid | Foreigner

2016 American Presidential Campaign

Status
Not open for further replies.
complete and utter fail by trump campaign: Donald Trump's first TV ad shows migrants 'at the southern border,' but they're actually in Morocco
In a new television ad -- his campaign’s first -- Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump shows footage of dozens of people swarming over a border fence. But the footage isn’t as it seems.

About halfway through the ad, a narrator says of Trump, "He'll stop illegal immigration by building a wall on our southern border that Mexico will pay for." Video footage shows dozens of people streaming across the border, as if they were ants fleeing an anthill.
his campaign responded with this very trumpy tweet:
No shit it's not the Mexican border, but that's what our country is going to look like. This was 1,000 percent on purpose.

trump fired his campaign manager, corey lewandowski, this morning. of course, in full donald style, firing a key campaign staffer is something for which he gave ted cruz shit. i guess it's not disloyalty and panic when the donald does it...

alasdair
 
Wow! Just wow.

I like the part of the article that more mexican immigrants are leaving than coming. I guess trump really wants to hold onto the idea that we are still number 1 even though his slogan is make america great again.
 
Actually it is a proven fact. Basically, he was "loaning his own money" to his campaign and when donors would make donations he would use those donations to either pay himself back or use his own private jet company, or his hotels. He also reimbursed himself for his and his family's travel and upkeep during the campaign. If this is not blatantly showing how he will handle the countries economy then I just don't know what will.

I hope that debate is "the slaughterhouse". Hillary deserves to get taken down a peg or two. I just don't trust his facts because trump uses incendiary rhetoric which generally is not true. Or only has a ring of truthiness about it (I always found this word funny because truth is kind of an absolute.)
 
Politifact? They're partisan/full of shit.
here are the 32 "pants on fire" lies listed for trump by politifact. if they are full of shit, you should have absolutely no trouble refuting, say, 5 of these and proving that trump did not utter these 32 lies?

if 5 seems like setting the bar way too high for you, just start with 1 or 2...

alasdair
 
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...wrong-clintons-refugee-plan-would-cost-more-/

Clinton's plan would cost less, sure. But what cost do you put on human life? How many will be killed or raped by these refugees? I find it hard to believe that it is even possible to "vet" people from Syria. What records exist?

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...-trump-suggests-barack-obama-supported-isis-/

The Obama administration destabilized Syria for Israel. https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/18328
They knew damn well Al Queda was involved in the insurgency they supported. http://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-con...12-DOD-Release-2015-04-10-final-version11.pdf

The first one we could argue over, the second one is blatant bullshit. The first two on their list. I plan on going further down the list when I have time.
 
if your response is just "yeah? well clinton lies too" then don't bother.

maybe we can find some common ground? almost all politicians are economical with - or have a loose relationship with - the truth.

but trump takes it to new levels of pants-on-fire dishonesty. the sad irony is that many of his supporters support him because he's a 'straight shooter' when he's the complete opposite.

where do we draw the line? is it crazy to suggest that, say, at least half of what's said by a candidate for the highest office in the land should be the truth?

alasdair
 
I just refuted 2 of poli"fact"s Donald Trump "pants on fire" lies like you challenged, or are you referring to 2 or 3 posts ago.

Perhaps you want people to ignore what I just posted?
 
ikbFXCw.jpg
 
^^^that picture made my morning.

In other news Marco Rubio (whom previously said he would no longer be running for any office) decided to throw his hat in the ring for a senate seat. He is the last person we need in office. He misappropriated funds in the state of florida in a very insidious manner.

How did Rubio misuse a GOP credit card?
The main focus of the current controversy is Rubio's mixing of personal and business expenses when he was speaker of the Florida House of Representatives. Between 2005 and 2008 Rubio had a Republican Party of Florida American Express card. Under IRS rules, donations to political parties, which are tax exempt, can only go toward influencing elections. According to former party spokesperson Katie Gordon, the card was "a corporate card and is meant to be used for business expenses." But the Tampa Bay Times reported in 2010 that much of the $100,000 Rubio put on the card counted as personal expenses, including lavish dinners, repairs to his family minivan, and purchases from a wine store near his house. There was even a $6,773 charge for a Rubio family reunion at a Georgia resort.

When the allegations first surfaced, Rubio said he reviewed the bill every month and paid for the expenses he deemed personal. "I was as diligent as possible to ensure the party did not pay for items that were unrelated to party business," he said. The Times reported that during his time as speaker, Rubio made $13,900 in payments to American Express to reimburse the party for his personal expenses. (His relatives sent checks that covered most of the reunion expenses, but the party wound up paying $714.) However, the paper found no evidence that the payments were made monthly, and there was one six-month period where Rubio made no payments.

There were various other issues with Rubio's political spending. Prior to becoming speaker, Rubio and his wife controlled two political committees that collected $600,000 altogether. The Times found that they failed to disclose $34,000 in expenses, paid family members for expenses that were incorrectly labeled, and spent little on contributions to other candidates. Later it was discovered that as speaker, Rubio double-billed the Republican Party of Florida and state taxpayers for eight flights, totaling about $2,400. He said it was a "mistake" and reimbursed the party.

In 2012, the Florida Commission on Ethics (yeah right. Governor rick scott got away with medicare fraud, Pam Bondi has not been investigated for taking money from trump to not prosecute him for his university...as well as many other ethical problems) looked at Rubio's use of his Florida GOP AMEX and cleared him of any wrongdoing. One investigator said he still found the "negligence" Rubio exhibited "disturbing."

This is how the GOP runs things. The commission on ethics is full of republicans.

When it comes to trump v. clinton: I am scared for this country. They both have less than half approval rating. Why do we have this choice? Why can't we have nominees that actually are approved by the majority of people? It is one of the reasons there has been so much voter apathy for so long. If you keep presenting the voters with choices they do not want to make they eventually stop making choices. Since the passing of citizens united, most people that are not wealthy (the vast majority of americans) feel they cannot influence politics one way or the other. It is particularly telling that they have such low approval ratings considering they only have to win over the wealthy oligarchs of this country. Yes only 41% and 47% of people approve of them, but in reality they only need to secure the votes of 1% of the voting population. The 1% also vote in much higher numbers...considering most people cannot take time off to vote due to the existential nightmare that is making ends meet in america.
 
Do you want 30% of your taxes coming out of your check? Isn't that enough to make you vote for Trump?
 
hillary-problem-tfernandez.png


One is a criminal, the other an idiot, we've lived through idiots before, we haven't elected a candidate that had to be fingerprinted and investigated by the FBI...yet.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top