Jump to content

[RESULTS ARE FINAL] 2016 Election for President of the United States | Donald Trump Victory


cr47t

Recommended Posts

So isn't the only physical way Sanders actually wins is if he takes California by like 90%?

 

Or again, one of the other two miracle situations in that either Hilary's transcripts come out and show she disqualified herself, or the FBI inditment comes down over the emails. Or a second Panama Paper leak that clearly names her. 

 

Tis a shame, but Bernie will be going to convention anyway. A very good thing to do. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 2.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

So isn't the only physical way Sanders actually wins is if he takes California by like 90%?

 

Or again, one of the other two miracle situations in that either Hilary's transcripts come out and show she disqualified herself, or the FBI inditment comes down over the emails. Or a second Panama Paper leak that clearly names her. 

 

Tis a shame, but Bernie will be going to convention anyway. A very good thing to do.

He needs 1,045 more votes. Even if we disregard superdelegates and hope some of Hillary's might switch to him, California would maybe give him half of what he needs. But I do think that Hillary needs to have a serious scandal come up. Just hoping that Bernie can make a comeback at the convention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm hoping Hillary gets indited AFTER she gets the nomination :)

 

You know..... thinking about it that kinda works for me, if it means Sanders can still get the nomination so this actually turns into a election with atleast 1 decent candidate, instead of one were you pick either plague or cholera, and letting plague win by default

 

What I would also love is that Trump's indited/resigns ASAP, because I dont know about you but his campaign has been disgracefull from start to finish and I'm actively afraid of the type of person the US citizens seem willing to put into office just because they keep shouting about "wanting to make america great again"

 

Hillary may be a snake in human clothing, but atleast she has enough political experience and tact to not run the country into the ground in 4 years (or atleast I hope so)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Indite the man who seems like he will get the largest margin of Republican votes since the conception of the party? Yeah funking right, Clinton wipes out Sanders, the only real threat to Trump, and then gets washed out herself due to the indictment. On what charges? Caring for his country and being the ray of change we've all been dying for?

 

American is going to be great again


Who knows, it's possible she could still beat Trump from jail :)

Her margin over Trump went from 12 points last month to 3 this month, don't count on it

 

That being said, I'll take literally anyone over Cruz...and I did vote for Hillary in the primary for w/e lack of judgment on my part...basically anyone but Cruz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Indite the man who seems like he will get the largest margin of Republican votes since the conception of the party? Yeah f***ing right, Clinton wipes out Sanders, the only real threat to Trump, and then gets washed out herself due to the indictment. On what charges? Caring for his country and being the ray of change we've all been dying for?

 

American is going to be great again

Her margin over Trump went from 12 points last month to 3 this month, don't count on it

I've said this before and I'll say it again; Trump's presence in the race is already damaging the image of the country in the eyes of probably everyone else; imagine what would happen if both he and Clinton got nominated and then she gets indicted; then we will REALLY be in trouble; why would anyone want to have a relationship with a country who has to decide between a convict and a divider?

 

EDIT: Also my 800th post. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've said this before and I'll say it again; Trump's presence in the race is already damaging the image of the country in the eyes of probably everyone else; imagine what would happen if both he and Clinton got nominated and then she gets indicted; then we will REALLY be in trouble; why would anyone want to have a relationship with a country who has to decide between a convict and a divider?

 

EDIT: Also my 800th post. :)

Russia and China, depending on how hard he hits Islam and if Modi stays in power, India

 

 

Mainly Russia tbh. I'll take it. If Trump is a divider, then just about every republican before him too (lol is that the point)

 

Selfishly, I'm really happy about a potential Russian-US alliance, maybe visiting my family in Russia won't be such a pain in the ass as it is under Obama

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've said this before and I'll say it again; Trump's presence in the race is already damaging the image of the country in the eyes of probably everyone else; imagine what would happen if both he and Clinton got nominated and then she gets indicted; then we will REALLY be in trouble; why would anyone want to have a relationship with a country who has to decide between a convict and a divider?

 

EDIT: Also my 800th post. :)

 

I'm not even ashamed to admit that atleast over here in sweden, it's a very popular joke that the current US election is a IQ test on the american people, and boy are the results looking grim.

 

And considering how Trump has publicly announced plans to strongarm countries like Mexico into doing what he wants, if he gets into office, I dont exactly consider it a "what if". Putting that man into the White House will have drastic, and longreaching negative impacts on the US, and probably the rest of the world given how the US (unfortunately) actually holds quite a bit of power even outside their own borders

 

Caring for his country and being the ray of change we've all been dying for?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh yes, "strong arming" a country that sits quietly as it's citizens break OUR laws and push the wage down for legal immigrants is such a crime isn't it. The US needs to start being self-reliant and not be pushed around as much as it is now. If making an example out of Mexico as it calmly breaks outs laws is what it takes to show that to the world, so be it.

 

 

 

Hey laz, he who lives in a glass house, should not throw rocks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Trump is a divider, then just about every republican before him too (lol is that the point)

No, my point is that Trump in office would destroy lots of connections between countries and between many people.

 

Also before I forget, a Trump University-related case is going to trial, so that could take him out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, my point is that Trump in office would destroy lots of connections between countries and between many people.

 

Also before I forget, a Trump University-related case is going to trial, so that could take him out.

A civil trial? After the main plaintiff dropped? Good one.

 

Nah, most of those connections can't afford to drop the US. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey laz, he who lives in a glass house, should not throw rocks

 

If that's an attempt to threaten me, you're gonna have to try waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay harder then that boyo

 

And good luck with that whole "self-reliant" thing.

Because we've discussed this in the past, and given the current economical climate there's not a chance in hell for the US to stand on its own

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If that's an attempt to threaten me, you're gonna have to try waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay harder then that boyo

 

And good luck with that whole "self-reliant" thing.

Because we've discussed this in the past, and given the current economical climate there's not a chance in hell for the US to stand on its own

Threaten? Nah. Question Sweden's irrelevancy? Why not?

 

As for economics, a United States with a trade surplus isn't gonna happen soon, atleast not untill we get rid of our Oil demands, but we can lower the deficit by a lot 

 

When was that published?

Uh, about a month ago, the point being it's not nearly a serious enough case to have any real impact...if calling Mexicans broadly as rapists didn't do it, some trumped up charges by a few idiots having cold feet wont do it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nah, most of those connections can't afford to drop the US. 

 

Sadly, this is true. I mean, most people outside of the US do think Americans are morons for allowing this to happen but at the end of the day the country's still going to command an incredible amount of power. I figure that if Nixon and George W Bush don't reduce America's power Clinton or Trump won't either.

 

edit: Want to cut the deficit? Raise taxes to a reasonable rate for filthy-rich people. Sweden might be "irrelevant" but they've ran either a surplus or a negligible deficit for the past 20 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Threaten? Nah. Question Sweden's irrelevancy? Why not?

 

Ouch. Almost felt that one.

But then I remember the US is dumb enough to elect Trump of all people despite knowing jack s*** about what he plans to do in office except "make america great again"

 

We may be irrelevant in the grand scheme of things, but our people are atleast clever enough to demand some basic capability from our elected representatives instead of them just shouting about making the country great again.

 

Hell, even our xenophobic right-wing extremists who've actively let it slip they would turn the country into a ethnicly homogenised dictatorship if we let them, still have more experience and political tact then Trump has success in running buisnesses

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clinton and any non-Trump republican actually might. If they drag us into another War in the ME the US is gonna be up shits creek. The fact that Sanders wants Saudi Arabia to fight it's own mess is one of the few reasons he might be better than Hills 

 

I was honestly thinking more so about how Mexico would burn from the inside out if the US put sanctions on it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But why would you place economic sanctions on Mexico for something so f***ing minor? Economic sanctions, because of the terrible pressure they place on the people within a nation, are generally only used against countries that are warmongering or violate human rights. Not on countries who struggle to control a big ass border. In what is already a fragile political climate, you want to drive another country into recession and poverty because they 'fail' to enforce the border properly. 

 

You don't create a good image of the US by bullying Mexico, an ally, into a shitty situation in a poor economic climate. It makes your country look like bullies, which is exactly the image that you've been trying to undo since the Middle East wars of the past decade. 

 

Because ironically enough, do you know the sort of thing that would be imposed on the US if it kept trying to impose economic sanctions on nations over minor sheet? They'd have economic sanctions placed on them to try and stop them doing it in the first place. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sadly, this is true. I mean, most people outside of the US do think Americans are morons for allowing this to happen but at the end of the day the country's still going to command an incredible amount of power. I figure that if Nixon and George W Bush don't reduce America's power Clinton or Trump won't either.

 

edit: Want to cut the deficit? Raise taxes to a reasonable rate for filthy-rich people. Sweden might be "irrelevant" but they've ran either a surplus or a negligible deficit for the past 20 years.

Oh we're gonna do that. Pretty sure Trump said he wanted the rich, such as himself, to be taxed more in the same interview he supported Transgendered rights.

 

Also I was talking about an international trade deficit. Not deficit spending. As in exports-imports (currently negative) should go +

 

Govenment revenue (assuming a balanced domestic budget) alone won't do that

But why would you place economic sanctions on Mexico for something so f***ing minor? Economic sanctions, because of the terrible pressure they place on the people within a nation, are generally only used against countries that are warmongering or violate human rights. Not on countries who struggle to control a big ass border. In what is already a fragile political climate, you want to drive another country into recession and poverty because they 'fail' to enforce the border properly. 

 

You don't create a good image of the US by bullying Mexico, an ally, into a shitty situation in a poor economic climate. It makes your country look like bullies, which is exactly the image that you've been trying to undo since the Middle East wars of the past decade. 

 

Because ironically enough, do you know the sort of thing that would be imposed on the US if it kept trying to impose economic sanctions on nations over minor sheet? They'd have economic sanctions placed on them to try and stop them doing it in the first place.

 

Well the only nation that Trump has outlined sanctions vs is Mexico...and he's not even come out and said that.

 

It's not minor Tom. Illegals give us legal immigrants a terrible name, amnesty as the democrats want to hand it out devalues any form of law, and if you could see the sheer amount of cocaine traffic (I'm sure opiates are bad too), you'd feel that the situation was more than minor (granted the US has been dealing with Drugs terribally, but Mexico not dealing with Cartels properly is eradicating lives)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But why would you place economic sanctions on Mexico for something so f***ing minor? Economic sanctions, because of the terrible pressure they place on the people within a nation, are generally only used against countries that are warmongering or violate human rights. Not on countries who struggle to control a big ass border. In what is already a fragile political climate, you want to drive another country into recession and poverty because they 'fail' to enforce the border properly. 

It's not minor at all.

 

f1f09a299fff92b67efdd967439cc11f.png

 

2435074f23453cbe649161504e192a11.png

 

Link + Source here

 

The united states has NO CAPACITY for Mexican Immigrants anymore. Too many of them go on welfare compared to go to work and the USA has a huge budget shortfall(so they cant go on welfare) and has huge barriers to getting a job(as shown by the declining labor force participation)

 

fredgraph+(2).png?rendition=image480

 

fredgraph1.png

 

What's the USA gonna do with them? They cant put 'em in a job and they cant put 'em on government.

 

I mean, if Mexico got some financial problems it would hurt the world economy, but if the USA collapses under the weight of its debt, it would create a new 2008.

 

Best thing to do in my opinion would be to give them jobs but I REALLY don't think that's possible without big tax breaks in the next year or something or deregulation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...