US Presidential Race 2016

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Mate the stuff I have been reading over the last couple of days from Wikileaks has depressed me. The media are doing such a good job at making Amercians be more worried about the actually hacking by Russia instead of what is contained in them and the corruption and human trafficking in the Clinton Foundation it's mindblowing.

It's difficult to know what to believe pal. All one can do is trust one's own gut and mine is telling me that Clinton and Trump both have very dark hearts, but to me she's slightly less objectionable and concerning than him.

 

[Scottyboi]

I still have no idea

I ain't going to link the video it's on youtube put spirit cooking in and watch it :)

 

[The Silver Surfer]

^
I don't know weather to laugh or cry!

 

[Scottyboi]

^
I don't know weather to laugh or cry!

The child doll in the corner nearly made me cry my son was infront of me at the time, that's why I didn't want to link it on here.

 

[Jim Tolmie's Underpants]

 

[CitizenTID]

Did you read the retraction they had to print when the journalist (cough, cough) from Fox News (Brett Baier) who MADE IT UP THAT INDICTMENTS WERE TO BE FORTHCOMING had to publicly apologize?

No, you didn't, because the DM, a right wing rag, didn't publish it!

Do you mean a different article? Because the one posted makes no mention of anything you refer to there and I merely used it to show there is still an ongoing FBI investigation; unless you link something that shows that Daily Mail article is outright lying in reporting on an on-going investigation into Clinton, the political stances of the Daily Mail aren't relevant to my post. Some of you in favour of Clinton on here are acting just like her, completely swerving anything putting her in question and responding by questioning something completely irrelevant to the initial point. Who gives a fuck what one irrelevant journalist said?

If your going to reply to a particular matter discussed in a post in this thread, can you do so without failing to discredit it with something completely off-tangent please? We were just discussing what the status of on-going matters are - if it's related to Clinton in a negative way, there is no use in you obscuring the validity of what is happening or has happened. I ask, because it's happened a fair few times now - I can't tell if your trying to convince people to share your opinion or are just that defensive over Clinton, but can we just keep it to useful information whatever posters' preferences? Because few of us on here can actually vote.

Think what I'm trying to say is, I sense a bit too much bias letting down some arguments on here when the argument doesn't apply to what it's attempting to counter (especially when there is nothing to counter-argue) whilst still creating enough noise attacking something from the other side to detract from the negative of the side being discussed. Could be your clever intention, but won't achieve anything worthwhile for you. On the flip side, It appears some on here are up to the required standards of a sustainable political career :)

 

[buckshot]

 

[mat]

Paul Ryan offered to speak at a trump rally today according to CNN.

That's one hell of a u-turn.

 

[Uptop]

The Bosnia sniper bit is so funny

 

[Paul Lake's Left Knee]

The FBI has found no evidence of criminality in the latest batch of Clinton emails.