Donald Trump invites Russia to hack Hillary Clinton

[Vassenor]

Trump is a troll. A good one.

And for that reason he should be the next US president. We certainly gonna have a good laugh.

I don't find state-enforced discrimination funny.

[Trumpostan]

Do you feel that somehow the RNC is any better? I'm pretty sure neither of them are saints.

The RNC is corrupt, by then again they aren't trying to insert a criminal into the White House.

So Trump defrauding investors, Trump Uni students and stiffing creditors aren't crimes?

[Vassenor]

The RNC is corrupt, by then again they aren't trying to insert a criminal into the White House.

So Trump defrauding investors, Trump Uni students and stiffing creditors aren't crimes?

Of course not. Trump can do no wrong.

[Nacesa Plana]

Trump is a troll. A good one.

And for that reason he should be the next US president. We certainly gonna have a good laugh.

I don't find state-enforced discrimination funny.

You really think he actually will install an import stop for Muslims? Will not happen.

[Vassenor]

I don't find state-enforced discrimination funny.

You really think he actually will install an import stop for Muslims? Will not happen.

Because that's totally the only discrimination in his platform.

[Nacesa Plana]

You really think he actually will install an import stop for Muslims? Will not happen.

Because that's totally the only discrimination in his platform.

Your last good president was Lyndon Johnson. All the others discriminated the people. They all took away the civil and social rights bit by bit. They all served the rich and not the people.

In the 50ties you could go to university and college for almost free in USA. Today, while the country is much richer, they can't afford it anymore.

[Vassenor]

Because that's totally the only discrimination in his platform.

Your last good president was Lyndon Johnson. All the others discriminated the people. They all took away the civil and social rights bit by bit. They all served the rich and not the people.

In the 50ties you could go to university and college for almost free in USA. Today, while the country is much richer, they can't afford it anymore.

So you're saying that a candidate who wants to make same-sex marriage illegal nationwide, as well as force through a bill that requires Trans individuals to use public toilets consistent with their sex at birth regardless of presentation or surgical status, and with a vice president who thinks women who miscarry should be tried for manslaughter, is a good thing because?

[Nacesa Plana]

Your last good president was Lyndon Johnson. All the others discriminated the people. They all took away the civil and social rights bit by bit. They all served the rich and not the people.

In the 50ties you could go to university and college for almost free in USA. Today, while the country is much richer, they can't afford it anymore.

So you're saying that a candidate who wants to make same-sex marriage illegal nationwide, as well as force through a bill that requires Trans individuals to use public toilets consistent with their sex at birth regardless of presentation or surgical status, and with a vice president who thinks women who miscarry should be tried for manslaughter, is a good thing because?

Look at the alternative.



Better?

No. The same shit. Different package.

But with troll Trump we will have a laugh.

[Vassenor]

So you're saying that a candidate who wants to make same-sex marriage illegal nationwide, as well as force through a bill that requires Trans individuals to use public toilets consistent with their sex at birth regardless of presentation or surgical status, and with a vice president who thinks women who miscarry should be tried for manslaughter, is a good thing because?

Look at the alternative.



Better?

No. The same shit. Different package.

But with troll Trump we will have a laugh.

Right. So I can totally see the funny side while I'm being beaten senseless.

[Nacesa Plana]

Look at the alternative.

(Image)

Better?

No. The same shit. Different package.

But with troll Trump we will have a laugh.

Right. So I can totally see the funny side while I'm being beaten senseless.

Both will not serve the poor and the middle class. Both will even not support the rich.
They will protect the need of the super riches.

They will continue what started with Nixon: dismantling the rights and privileges of all. Both will use the politics of ‘divide and rule’. When the mass is weak, the super riches are strong.

Clinton or Trump, we’re f*cked by both. I prefer to be f*cked with a smile on my face. Go for Trump.

[Vassenor]

I hope you enjoy the blood on your hands then.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

Her flaws are minor considering the horror show that is Trump, and her policies are reasonably progressive and forward-looking. There's also the nice benefit of them being based in reality.

So basically you don't support Clinton your liberal and really have no other choices?

Sorry, did I make it unclear that I find her policies to be reasonably progressive and forward looking? I thought that my use of the phrase "her policies are reasonably progressive and forward looking" would indicate that I do actually see positives in her, but I may have not stated it in a comprehensible manner. Let me try again: Her policies are reasonably progressive and forward looking. I like that, Therefore, I will be voting for her, and not simply against Trump.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

You're comparing a stupid choice of words to shooting someone?

He's insinuating that it was okay for Clinton to say it because she "apologized". So applied the principle to a different situation to see if it was still okay then.

No, because there's no equivalence. That's utterly insane.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

I don't find state-enforced discrimination funny.

You really think he actually will install an import stop for Muslims? Will not happen.

I find it troubling that people are actually willing to vote for a candidate because they don't believe that he will do what he says. That's the reverse of how it's supposed to work.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

So you're saying that a candidate who wants to make same-sex marriage illegal nationwide, as well as force through a bill that requires Trans individuals to use public toilets consistent with their sex at birth regardless of presentation or surgical status, and with a vice president who thinks women who miscarry should be tried for manslaughter, is a good thing because?

Look at the alternative.



Better?

No. The same shit. Different package.

But with troll Trump we will have a laugh.

Yes, when his tax plan blows a $17 trillion dollar hole in the budget, and he and Congress cut Medicare as a result, I and millions of others who are dependent upon this program to keep ourselves or our loved ones alive will find it hilarious as their lives are put at risk.

[Nacesa Plana]

You really think he actually will install an import stop for Muslims? Will not happen.

I find it troubling that people are actually willing to vote for a candidate because they don't believe that he will do what he says. That's the reverse of how it's supposed to work.

Politicians often don’t do what they say.

They bark to impress the voter. But later they are confronted with reality. Sometimes they realize that the initial idea is not practical executable. Sometimes it’s unlawful and they find no support to modify the law.

Most of the time, they are very aware that they can’t do what they say. The words are just marketing. Nothing more.

[Itchyarmpit]

When Trump is president we should invite Russia to hack him. Let's see how he'll like that!

[Yumyumsuppertime]

I find it troubling that people are actually willing to vote for a candidate because they don't believe that he will do what he says. That's the reverse of how it's supposed to work.

Politicians often don’t do what they say.

They bark to impress the voter. But later they are confronted with reality. Sometimes they realize that the initial idea is not practical executable. Sometimes it’s unlawful and they find no support to modify the law.

Most of the time, they are very aware that they can’t do what they say. The words are just marketing. Nothing more.

If a President has a supportive Congress, he or she will generally try to fulfill at least some campaign promises. Bush did, Bill Clinton did for a short while, Reagan did. It's one thing to be cynical, but it's another thing entirely to be both cynical and wrong.

[Nacesa Plana]

Look at the alternative.

(Image)

Better?

No. The same shit. Different package.

But with troll Trump we will have a laugh.

Yes, when his tax plan blows a $17 trillion dollar hole in the budget, and he and Congress cut Medicare as a result, I and millions of others who are dependent upon this program to keep ourselves or our loved ones alive will find it hilarious as their lives are put at risk.

Will you go with Clinton back to 50ties and 60ties? Will you have your rights back? Cheap education? A payable and a good working healthcare system? Will the poor get more money? Will the retired ones get what they deserve?

No.

She will make sure that the super riches benefit from her policy. And only them.

In the meantime she’s using some marketing mumbo jumbo to delude the people.

Trump is not better. But he’ll make the people happy with his retarded ideas. You're still f*cked. But with a smile on your face.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

Yes, when his tax plan blows a $17 trillion dollar hole in the budget, and he and Congress cut Medicare as a result, I and millions of others who are dependent upon this program to keep ourselves or our loved ones alive will find it hilarious as their lives are put at risk.

Will you go with Clinton back to 50ties and 60ties? Will you have your rights back? Cheap education? A payable and a good working healthcare system? Will the poor get more money? Will the retired ones get what they deserve?

No.

She will make sure that the super riches benefit from her policy. And only them.

In the meantime she’s using some marketing mumbo jumbo to delude the people.

Trump is not better. But he’ll make the people happy with his retarded ideas. You're still f*cked. But with a smile on your face.

First, I'm not really lacking any rights. Second, one of her positions is for free college tuition for income-qualifying families, and my family qualifies, meaning that if my kid manages to make it to college, we won't have to be dependent on student loans. She's wants to expand Medicare and include a public option, so yes, I believe that her health care plans are sound. As the $15 dollar minimum wage is a major issue for Democrats, yes, many poor people will get significantly more money. She also wants to expand Social Security.

You actually hit on a number of points that are absolutely central to her campaign. Even at the most basic, cynical level, you must realize that if she doesn't at least try for some of these things, then she's going to be a one term president, and she's too ambitious to want that. You seem to have some cartoon villain image of her, when in reality she's an ambitious moderate who is willing to pivot left and support progressive legislation if she thinks that it has a chance of passing, and won't overly damage her career.

[Nacesa Plana]

Will you go with Clinton back to 50ties and 60ties? Will you have your rights back? Cheap education? A payable and a good working healthcare system? Will the poor get more money? Will the retired ones get what they deserve?

No.

She will make sure that the super riches benefit from her policy. And only them.

In the meantime she’s using some marketing mumbo jumbo to delude the people.

Trump is not better. But he’ll make the people happy with his retarded ideas. You're still f*cked. But with a smile on your face.

First, I'm not really lacking any rights. Second, one of her positions is for free college tuition for income-qualifying families, and my family qualifies, meaning that if my kid manages to make it to college, we won't have to be dependent on student loans. She's wants to expand Medicare and include a public option, so yes, I believe that her health care plans are sound. As the $15 dollar minimum wage is a major issue for Democrats, yes, many poor people will get significantly more money. She also wants to expand Social Security.

You actually hit on a number of points that are absolutely central to her campaign. Even at the most basic, cynical level, you must realize that if she doesn't at least try for some of these things, then she's going to be a one term president, and she's too ambitious to want that. You seem to have some cartoon villain image of her, when in reality she's an ambitious moderate who is willing to pivot left and support progressive legislation if she thinks that it has a chance of passing, and won't overly damage her career.

Her husband was 8 years in charge. Nothing critical changed. He gave you some breadcrumbs with his left hand and took your bread away with his right hand.

You really don't get it. In the US system, the politicians don't serve the people anymore. They need tons of money to get elected and it's not your money.

They get the election-money from the super riches and the multinationals. And later who will they obey and serve for real? You? Or the ones that gave them the money?

The ones that gave them the money like it that you're...

• divided and not organized
• not too wealthy
• not have too much civil and social rights

...this is guaranteeing at least the status quo for the super riches.

Sure, all presidents, or at least most, did something good for the ordinary people. But that's just a marketing tactic.

One day they are against same-sex marriage, the other day they are not. And you’re just eating popcorn and feeling alright. You don’t care anymore. Me either.

[Vassenor]

So basically you want to throw minorities off a cliff "because it'll be funny"?

[Yumyumsuppertime]

First, I'm not really lacking any rights. Second, one of her positions is for free college tuition for income-qualifying families, and my family qualifies, meaning that if my kid manages to make it to college, we won't have to be dependent on student loans. She's wants to expand Medicare and include a public option, so yes, I believe that her health care plans are sound. As the $15 dollar minimum wage is a major issue for Democrats, yes, many poor people will get significantly more money. She also wants to expand Social Security.

You actually hit on a number of points that are absolutely central to her campaign. Even at the most basic, cynical level, you must realize that if she doesn't at least try for some of these things, then she's going to be a one term president, and she's too ambitious to want that. You seem to have some cartoon villain image of her, when in reality she's an ambitious moderate who is willing to pivot left and support progressive legislation if she thinks that it has a chance of passing, and won't overly damage her career.

Her husband was 8 years in charge. Nothing critical changed. He gave you some breadcrumbs with his left hand and took your bread away with his right hand.

You really don't get it. In the US system, the politicians don't serve the people anymore. They need tons of money to get elected and it's not your money.

They get the election-money from the super riches and the multinationals. And later who will they obey and serve for real? You? Or the ones that gave them the money?

The ones that gave them the money like it that you're...

• divided and not organized
• not too wealthy
• not have too much civil and social rights

...this is guaranteeing at least the status quo for the super riches.

Sure, all presidents, or at least most, did something good for the ordinary people. But that's just a marketing tactic.

One day they are against same-sex marriage, the other day they are not. And you’re just eating popcorn and feeling alright. You don’t care anymore. Me either.

Her husband ran on a program of shifting the Democrats to the middle, which he did, cutting military spending, which he did, and universal health care, which he and Hillary tried to implement, but failed at.

If Presidents actually do good, I don't care if it's a marketing tactic or it comes from the heart.

[Nacesa Plana]

Her husband was 8 years in charge. Nothing critical changed. He gave you some breadcrumbs with his left hand and took your bread away with his right hand.

You really don't get it. In the US system, the politicians don't serve the people anymore. They need tons of money to get elected and it's not your money.

They get the election-money from the super riches and the multinationals. And later who will they obey and serve for real? You? Or the ones that gave them the money?

The ones that gave them the money like it that you're...

• divided and not organized
• not too wealthy
• not have too much civil and social rights

...this is guaranteeing at least the status quo for the super riches.

Sure, all presidents, or at least most, did something good for the ordinary people. But that's just a marketing tactic.

One day they are against same-sex marriage, the other day they are not. And you’re just eating popcorn and feeling alright. You don’t care anymore. Me either.

Her husband ran on a program of shifting the Democrats to the middle, which he did, cutting military spending, which he did, and universal health care, which he and Hillary tried to implement, but failed at.

If Presidents actually do good, I don't care if it's a marketing tactic or it comes from the heart.

Like I told you earlier:

He gave you some breadcrumbs with his left hand and took your bread away with his right hand.

He could have changed the education system. Like it was in the 50ties. Education for all. Almost for free. You didn't leave college or university with high debts around your neck in those time. And this while USA was more poor as present times.

He didn't. He just gave you some breadcrumbs. A bit windows dressing to give you a feel good feeling.

His wife will do the same. If elected.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

Her husband ran on a program of shifting the Democrats to the middle, which he did, cutting military spending, which he did, and universal health care, which he and Hillary tried to implement, but failed at.

If Presidents actually do good, I don't care if it's a marketing tactic or it comes from the heart.

Like I told you earlier:

He gave you some breadcrumbs with his left hand and took your bread away with his right hand.

He could have changed the education system. Like it was in the 50ties. Education for all. Almost for free. You didn't leave college or university with high debts around your neck in those time. And this while USA was more poor as present times.

He didn't. He just gave you some breadcrumbs. A bit windows dressing to give you a feel good feeling.

His wife will do the same. If elected.

Goalpost moving. The point was that most Presidents, even if it's only to get to a second term, tend to try to keep their promises if at all possible, as breaking them ("Read my lips: No new taxes") can be politically fatal. He didn't run on free education, so that's not relevant to the point.