Bernie supporters are saying lot of poll places in NY closed early, along with other issues. Dunno if that's true or not, but it is somewhat a weird conspiracy.
They chose Trump as a candidate and are now regretting it, no? Since when have they made sense during this candidate?
And maybe it's because they'd rather go up against Hillary than Bernie? I mean, Bernie is dangerous due to the support he's gotten.
Bernie supporters are saying lot of poll places in NY closed early, along with other issues. Dunno if that's true or not, but it is somewhat a weird conspiracy.
I dont understand the closing early complaint when in the places in question Clinton has a very sizable lead. One would have to be under the believe that A) all the removed voters would have voted for Sanders, and B) those turned away from polls were only going to vote for Sanders.
Based on the numbers theres only three or so counties where the difference in votes is litrally 60 - <800 votes.
I dont understand the closing early complaint when in the places in question Clinton has a very sizable lead. One would have to be under the believe that A) all the removed voters would have voted for Sanders, and B) those turned away from polls were only going to vote for Sanders.
Based on the numbers theres only three or so counties where the difference in votes is litrally 60 - <800 votes.
"Bernie Sanders' campaign on Tuesday called reports of voting irregularities in New York state "a disgrace" as local officials rushed to condemn the city Board of Elections for stripping more than 125,000 Democratic voters from the rolls."
"Of the 126,000 Democratic voters taken off from the rolls in Brooklyn, Ryan said 12,000 had moved out of borough, while 44,000 more had been placed in an inactive file after mailings to their homes bounced back. An additional 70,000 were already inactive and, having failed to vote in two successive federal elections or respond to cancel notices, were removed." http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/19/politics/new-york-primary-voter-problem-polls-sanders-de-blasio/
Sooo Trump and Clinton win, not surprising at all. Although this here is interesting:
I wonder why Sanders went in so hard with New York? Being positive is nice but winning New York was impossible for him I'd say. Notice Trump's spendings
Really? Do you have a source? Honestly, I have yet to find a single vaguely adequate source which suggests there is some form or context in which the wall would do what it is supposed to do. If anything it seems like a conceptual impossibility because a good chunk of immigrants simply don't cross the border that way.
What kkck...produce the pro-Wall articles pls. I consider it an objectively bad idea because nothing Trump has said about it can be promised and followed through on, and it won't even solve the problems not having a wall supposedly causes.
I've read many things on many places in the past 5 months of involvement with this election, both on the republican and democrat side. I'm sure you can find ample articles yourself if you exit the left echo chambers
From what I remember, the pro-wall sentiments are based on being able to deal with the major issues. The ones that stick out the most are price, reason and usefulness.
For the price, Mexico is paying for it and Trump can and will make them pay for it, I believe someone mentioned the reason already in this thread recently. IIRC the estimate is ~8 billion for the wall?
To justify it's existence, Trump and his supporters mention the trade deficit with Mexico along the huge spending the US does for the healthcare and housing of the illegals, making it worthwhile when you compare the spendings of both.
As for the usefulness, that's a bit less stable. There's several comparisons using Hungary's and Israel's walls and how largely effective those were. Although I admit that's not very meaningful. Certainly walls do work, and people who don't think so are quite naive. Yet the US situation is different from Israel and Hungary so how useful it'll ultimately be I'm unsure.
Of course with risky decisions like these you can't guarantee the success, hence why it's a risk. Is it worth taking? Perhaps.
Give a lot of people the same advantages Trump had, and they'll likely do even better. Loan from his dad, even more money after his dad's death, and connections. This is a clear example of how people with money have more advantages than people who don't have much money, as much as Sharkbait likes to deny it.
This is like the most commoner-esque thing you could've said and is basically the mentality of your usual normal guy. "If I suddenly had a lot of money I'd do well with it". That's simply not the case. Refer to pretty much every lotto winner ever who just used up all their money and returned to square one.
Look, it's definitely much much easier to start a business and to expand your worth if you start out large. But it's still a rather large feat to succeed leading corporations and increasing your income, and I assume ~90% of the people in the world would be incapable to do that. Some would lose all, few would stay where they are or increase it a little bit, and the fewest of all would be able to go the distance.
Actually she did respond, in a way. I could try to look up the video for you if you want. She was asked in an interview what she thinks of Trump's newest nickname for her. All she said was "I don't respond to Donald Trump". So Hillary doesn't respond to her political rivals in this election? I wonder how she plans to last in the general election with that attitude. I see her melting like Jeb.
I'm not going to try too hard to minimize the guy's accomplishments, but the guy has never gone hungry or had to struggle to live the kind of life he does.
But yeah, to the average /pol/ visitor I guess I'm just another "libcuck". But it's funny considering who they're supporting and what he actually stands for.
Just looked at the candidates' tax plans, and I'm not sure how I feel. I think Trump's policy is better towards businesses, even though the successful ones can afford to pay more taxes.
While it does serve some statistical purpose, you should know that polls for the general election during the primaries are hardly accurate. I'd wage them somewhere at ~40% accuracy. The general election debates will be the vital deciding point.
I'm pretty sure that the person with the most benefits of low democrat turnouts is Clinton, so I'm surprised that you're not blaming her instead.
The GOP seems busy enough dealing with Trump, as there's been many reported problems with ballots or online voting counts on the republican side as well.
I've read many things on many places in the past 5 months of involvement with this election, both on the republican and democrat side. I'm sure you can find ample articles yourself if you exit the left echo chambers
From what I remember, the pro-wall sentiments are based on being able to deal with the major issues. The ones that stick out the most are price, reason and usefulness.
For the price, Mexico is paying for it and Trump can and will make them pay for it, I believe someone mentioned the reason already in this thread recently. IIRC the estimate is ~8 billion for the wall?
To justify it's existence, Trump and his supporters mention the trade deficit with Mexico along the huge spending the US does for the healthcare and housing of the illegals, making it worthwhile when you compare the spendings of both.
As for the usefulness, that's a bit less stable. There's several comparisons using Hungary's and Israel's walls and how largely effective those were. Although I admit that's not very meaningful. Certainly walls do work, and people who don't think so are quite naive. Yet the US situation is different from Israel and Hungary so how useful it'll ultimately be I'm unsure.
Of course with risky decisions like these you can't guarantee the success, hence why it's a risk. Is it worth taking? Perhaps.
At least produce one source... If you are so far outside the left echo chamber I am sure that should not be difficult. At least in my case no amount of google helped to actually find arguments for the wall. Seriously, just one article from a reputable source...
There is very little reason to think mexico will pay for the wall. And how exactly would the wall even help with the issues you mention? The deficit would be left intact regardless of the wall. It's not like the mexican government even has "deficit money". And the wall wouldn't help in the least to reduce health care cost or housing of illegals... I mean, immigrants are already at the US. I think you are suggesting the wall should be built regardless of whether it even has a chance of working (which it doesn't simply because most immigrants don't go to the states through the border). Building the wall on principle is just dumb....
I've read many things on many places in the past 5 months of involvement with this election, both on the republican and democrat side. I'm sure you can find ample articles yourself if you exit the left echo chambers
From what I remember, the pro-wall sentiments are based on being able to deal with the major issues. The ones that stick out the most are price, reason and usefulness.
For the price, Mexico is paying for it and Trump can and will make them pay for it, I believe someone mentioned the reason already in this thread recently. IIRC the estimate is ~8 billion for the wall?
To justify it's existence, Trump and his supporters mention the trade deficit with Mexico along the huge spending the US does for the healthcare and housing of the illegals, making it worthwhile when you compare the spendings of both.
As for the usefulness, that's a bit less stable. There's several comparisons using Hungary's and Israel's walls and how largely effective those were. Although I admit that's not very meaningful. Certainly walls do work, and people who don't think so are quite naive. Yet the US situation is different from Israel and Hungary so how useful it'll ultimately be I'm unsure.
Of course with risky decisions like these you can't guarantee the success, hence why it's a risk. Is it worth taking? Perhaps.
Well okay then, I guess you can't produce any written support for it.
Mexico isn't going to pay for it dude. Holding foreign aid hostage isn't the same thing. Anything else his campaign has proposed has severe legal ambiguity at best. And pls, no one should take estimates as gospel. There's no way the thing won't run over budget. I've seen some estimates at $17 billion, others as high as $30 billion.
A bit less stable? the wall in the West Bank is nothing like Trump's proposal. I mean, even if it was, a lot of good it's done right? The thing isn't even finished and it's like 20 years in production, while being one fifth as long as our border with Mexico. And this is Israel building it, not some third-world country.
And as far as Hungary goes, they constructed a fence, not a wall. While I don't doubt that it's been effective, it was in direct response to a recent crisis, not a steady flow like it is here. We've had fences (and walls actually) on our southern border for years now, despite huge ecological problems, among other things. They're still being constructed in Texas in some places.
Trump's wall is a pipe dream, you're deluded if you think it'll ever be completed. It's a logistical and legal nightmare.
No, it means I maintain that he's a bullshit artist. He came from wealth and he became wealthier. It's not the same as building something from nothing.
She was afraid though, and I'm pretty sure she was uneasy at one point because she went from easy victory to losing an area to someone who barely got attention.
It does because if people who vote for Bernie can't vote for him until work is over or due to school, then they can't vote. Apparently first time voters are the most unable to vote because of the confusing process, but I don't know if this is true or just an excuse for Bernie not winning.
This is like the most commoner-esque thing you could've said and is basically the mentality of your usual normal guy. "If I suddenly had a lot of money I'd do well with it". That's simply not the case. Refer to pretty much every lotto winner ever who just used up all their money and returned to square one.
Look, it's definitely much much easier to start a business and to expand your worth if you start out large. But it's still a rather large feat to succeed leading corporations and increasing your income, and I assume ~90% of the people in the world would be incapable to do that. Some would lose all, few would stay where they are or increase it a little bit, and the fewest of all would be able to go the distance.
Not really, it's common sense, although I'm mainly talking about people who grew up in a wealthy family. I highly doubt Trump would have been as big as he is/was if not for his dad giving him money twice, as well as having all the right connections.
It's not as large a feat when you get inheritance to keep your corporations afloat.
This reminds me of "White people don't know what it's like to be poor"
I'm confused. Based on that tool, Bernie's plan doesn't seem to be bad at all, at least for me (whether I do 8500 per year or 45000). Sure, I keep more now than I would under Bernie's plan, but I don't lose as much as people claim I would.
I'm pretty sure that the person with the most benefits of low democrat turnouts is Clinton, so I'm surprised that you're not blaming her instead.
The GOP seems busy enough dealing with Trump, as there's been many reported problems with ballots or online voting counts on the republican side as well.
Depends, I guess, but the only thing is that I didn't share I suspected her too. I wouldn't be shocked if she or her team played a huge part in making sure it was harder for democrats to vote, at least for the youths.
Does Trump support most citizens or does he only support the wealthy people? I read that he would let his wealthy Muslim friends come into the country anytime.
So getting around the seemingly serious side of this - I am so voting for trump.
Dudes I want that wall built and them illegals outta here. Close them borders, make America great again.
Defeat ISIS - OR ISIL.
Can't wait.
So getting around the seemingly serious side of this - I am so voting for trump.
Dudes I want that wall built and them illegals outta here. Close them borders, make America great again.
Defeat ISIS - OR ISIL.
Can't wait.
Yes sir - but I am voting for team Trump.
Don't like the Hills (moar like can't stand pull hair) - would have considered Bern's but he ain't gona be the dem candidate.
or, don't vote. Otherwise you might as well set the entire country on fire with how Trump's gonna fuck shit up. Hell, I wouldn't be shocked if you got deported just for looking Muslim.
or, don't vote. Otherwise you might as well set the entire country on fire with how Trump's gonna fuck shit up. Hell, I wouldn't be shocked if you got deported just for looking Muslim.
.........
I want them illegals out man - all of them.
Trump is the only choice in this illogical world that we live in.
Guess you're going for Hill or do you see mr sanders making out at the top still?
Fyi - heard a pro sanders advertisement.
The just of it goes something like trying to identify with the blacks, to get their support.
Apparently Mr Sanders, took part in the MLK protests and got arrested for being supportive.
On the Hills side - I am a woman - vote for me because I stand for women's rights. .
I have exp in this and being that.