Senate The 2016 U.S. Presidential Election has begun

You guys have at least and exactly one thing in common now.

 

But it was an AOL server. It wasn't his server sitting on his kitchen table. He could delete emails from his account. But AOL still had them on their server off site. They could be subpoenaed for any emails he deleted. If I understand what you are saying, my email is a gmail account. So I can't get rid of any emails. Google always has them. AOL would still have any emails Powell sent or received. While security is an issue, he would still have accountability.

Hillary had physical possession of her server. To have, erase, destroy.

 

Yes, my mother intends to vote for trump.

This is a woman whose record is Clinton, Clinton, Gore, Kerry, Obama, and Obama.

 

This could be any middle class democratic "Joe or Jane Blow from Idaho" talking, Trump is going to win this, mark my words, right place, right time in history.
And nothing can stop it, I sense destiny here.
I laugh at Americans that are more afraid of Trump than Radical Islam, you got your fear radar all screwed up.

 

That's because he already is!

/breitbart

 

Thinks he can sense things, thinks destiny exists, yet laughs at others

 

How do you feel about inciting America's enemies to commit an act of terrorism against them? Like saying, "ISIS, please, we need you to bomb us because we're not good people. Please kill all the Americans you can."

Would you consider that incitement to acts of political violence acceptable?

I assume yes since you have no qualms about a presidential nominee doing the same thing with an act of cyberterrorism.

Why would they, when they haven't finished doing this in Baghdad or Kabul?

Immaterial. If a foreign state, through its intelligence agencies, sought do to do America what you lot have done for years and use clandestine methods to influence an election, and their target were the right, you personally would be furious. You know you would.

If the only difference is the attack undermines your enemy in your eyes - as opposed to your democracy - then I don't know what to tell you.

 

My mother switched from being a Hillary hater to planning to vote for her, and she lives in a swing state! She fears Trump and really can't understand why everyone isn't scared of him.

She used to loathe Hillary for years. Just the thought of Hillary made her feel icky (which I believe motivates part of the opposition to Hillary). We don't talk politics that much at all, but I would defend Hillary to no avail. Then, a few months after Trump came on the scene, she came around all on her own! Now she's an enthusiastic supporter of Hillary.





"When Trump becomes President, I want to be able to tell my children that I did everything to stop him."

 

see, you say "enthusiastic supporter of hillary" but all the other information in this post points towards "hillary is the lesser of two evils"

which isnt the same thing and if you think it is, that's depressing

 

Mate this is just wrong ok? Bin Laden's speeches, and his 1998 fatwa (which he lacked the religious authority to declare) make clear his reasoning. It's public domain information:

http://fas.org/irp/world/para/docs/980223-fatwa.htm

"First, for over seven years the United States has been occupying the lands of Islam in the holiest of places, the Arabian Peninsula, plundering its riches, dictating to its rulers, humiliating its people, terrorizing its neighbors, and turning its bases in the Peninsula into a spearhead through which to fight the neighboring Muslim peoples.

...

Third, if the Americans' aims behind these wars are religious and economic, the aim is also to serve the Jews' petty state and divert attention from its occupation of Jerusalem and murder of Muslims there. The best proof of this is their eagerness to destroy Iraq, the strongest neighboring Arab state, and their endeavor to fragment all the states of the region such as Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Sudan into paper statelets and through their disunion and weakness to guarantee Israel's survival and the continuation of the brutal crusade occupation of the Peninsula.

All these crimes and sins committed by the Americans are a clear declaration of war on Allah, his messenger, and Muslims. And ulema have throughout Islamic history unanimously agreed that the jihad is an individual duty if the enemy destroys the Muslim countries. This was revealed by Imam Bin-Qadamah in "Al- Mughni," Imam al-Kisa'i in "Al-Bada'i," al-Qurtubi in his interpretation, and the shaykh of al-Islam in his books, where he said: "As for the fighting to repulse [an enemy], it is aimed at defending sanctity and religion, and it is a duty as agreed [by the ulema]. Nothing is more sacred than belief except repulsing an enemy who is attacking religion and life."
The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies -- civilians and military -- is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it, in order to liberate the al-Aqsa Mosque and the holy mosque [Mecca] from their grip, and in order for their armies to move out of all the lands of Islam, defeated and unable to threaten any Muslim. This is in accordance with the words of Almighty Allah, "and fight the pagans all together as they fight you all together," and "fight them until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah." "

How can bin Laden have viewed the US as weak yet called it out for trying to destroy and occupy Arabia? And why did he not say the duty was to strike while they were weak?

Because it's wrong to assert what you asserted, basically.

And that theory came from someone so breathtakingly stupid that it was a crime they weren't strangled in their cot as a child. Morons think that, Starbob. Morons who know nothing and read nothing because if they read they might learn, and if they learn they might realise how much of their life is based on a lie.

 

What else is new? The Democratic candidate has been the lesser of two evils as long as I'm alive.

 

1. I didn't elect him in this position, and
2. I think you're confused right now with Angela Merkel.

There, fixed it for you. Though it's still a polite way of saying "wrong".

 

people were excited by obama. i know because i was one of them in 2008 before my politics changed significantly. hillary just doesnt have the enthusiastic support that trump (and obama before him) has. she's in the romney/mccain position of being the palatable establishment candidate who beat out the more inspiring candidate because the base was told it was the price of winning against the great evil of the opposition

 

Yeah, I know, and certainly the initial change was because Trump has her scared ****less, but the way she talks about Hillary is enthusiastic. She tries to convince other people to vote for her, and she minimizes all her negatives (this probably where my prior conversations helped sway her b/c the way she defends Hillary is very similar to how I do). Total 180. The way she describes Hillary now is as someone who doesn't come across as likable, but smart, experienced, capable, and treated unfairly.

I think the rise of Trump has also changed her view of people. Some people she knows have become more open with their racism in the Obama years, and Trump's success has convinced her that far more people her age are racist than she wanted to admit before.

She basically switched from thinking our best days were in the past to thinking young people have had it right all along. She's even switched on issues like gay marriage. I'm glad I didn't have to talk her into it, which I think I'll have to do with my mother-in-law. For her, it's like the Jedi mind trick. She'll vote the same way as whoever the last person she spoke to intended vote.




"When Trump becomes President, I want to be able to tell my children that I did everything to stop him."

 

Omg you guys, my mom hates Hillary TOO!!

 

Is she planning to vote for Trump?

 

full disclosure: my parents hate hillary and seem to be leaning towards leaving the presidential space on the ballot blank

we live in arizona tho so it doesnt really matter either way

 

Pretty sure that's just Rylo Ken being Rylo Ken.

 

Starrobert, whilst I appreciate your ongoing efforts to prove the link between conservatism in the US and worldly ignorance, you could just use some objective sites and draw conclusions from there.

Daesh, or ISIS as they're called by twits, grew in a country that a bunch of arrogant, culturally insular religious warriors called Republicans effectively destroyed. See as wicked as he was, Saddam Hussein al-Tikriti actually played a vital role in managing and nullifying sectarian violence* in Iraq.

You see, like the terrorists that America supported openly in Ireland, people of the same faith but different denominations can fight one another. Shi'ite and Sunni Muslims have a fundamental disagreement on theological grounds about a bloke named Abu Bakr - Muhammed's father in law and his successor as ruler of the Islamic caliphate. Sunnis believe Abu Bakr was also a prophet, Shia Muslims don't. Like Catholics and Protestants in Ireland, they fight over it except here they don't have Americans supporting terrorism and calling it "the cause".

Saddam, as an Arab Nationalist, was also Sunni but he kept the Sunni and Shia from fighting. When the US, full of the arrogant and ignorant assumption that American values are global values, launched a war of aggression in 2003 they removed Saddam, dismantled his Ba'ath party and the army. They did this against advise from experts, because they were pushing American values and American values don't need the input of experts because all values are American values. Even though this was shown to be false, people still believe it to be true because Jesus or something. I don't know, I haven't found a way to lobotomise myself enough to be a conservative.

This created a power vacuum and nature abhors a vacuum.

There is a direct correlation between people of low socio-economic status in the Mideast and sympathy to radicalisation. The simplest explanation is that these are people are forgotten, marginalised, disaffected, and disenfranchised and they are given a sense of purpose, identity, and belief by radical ideas. It's no surprise that so many come from weak states. Given an area with which to operate, and naturally they swell into a full scale force from a tiny movement, drawing in Arabs, Persians, and Central Asians who feel that this is the only place they will have a shot at a future, and the only place they belong.

Syria was actually a very strong state which had for the longest time successfully put down Islamic extremism in a number of violent ways. But with the Arab Spring kicking off, US intelligence had encouraged pro-Democracy advocates in Syria to rise up. No material support was given, of course, but if there's two words guaranteed to give an American an erection or an orgasm in their trousers, it's Democracy and Freedom.

I'll give you a moment to clean up.

So seeing Democracy, that precious gift from God, being within reach the CIA et al provided information to Syrian dissident groups (and arguably facilitate their access to arms) and hoped that despite the precedent in post-Mubarak Egypt, Syria would be a democracy with McDonalds and Starbucks and the NRA and all those things which scream Freedom. Bashar al-Asad fought back, and the country descended into civil war and there was a power vacuum.

nature, as we have said, abhors a vacuum. Hence why Islamic State could double its territory and reach.

Such a vacuum does not exist in the countries you have listed. Do you see now why it was a vacuous question?

 

In 2008 and 2012 liberal JCCers were telling people to vote for Obama based on his policies. In 2016 they're saying to vote hillary to keep trump away.*

*with the exception of dp who is a right leaning democrat and ghost who is....ghost.

 

ghost has a history of getting excited about such politicians as herman cain and mike huckabee. if a pundit on tv got excited about the politician he's going to get excited about them too. he's... impressionable