annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
Here I was thinking that you were voting for her due to one simple fact ... she's NOT Trump.
You were thinking. That's the difference between you and CC.
I will be voting for Hillary Clinton.
- Thread starter annabenedetti
- Start date
- Status
You were thinking. That's the difference between you and CC.
:chuckle: The fact is ...
I can't think of any politician or candidate II wouldn't vote for IF the other candidate was Trump. Voting for another candidate isn't always an endorsement of the candidate but rather the vote against a dangerous, anti-American cretin who not only puts our freedoms at risk very but the security of our nation as well.
While Ted Cruz wouldn't have been my first choice for the R. candidate, he is 100% more competent, moral and ... well ... SANE than Trump.
WonderfulLordJesus
New member
Liberals are such Johnny-one-notes. They can't defend all their evil and destructive policies, their enmity against the very word of God and those who stand with His perfect word (just why are they on TOL?), their homo "marriages" an affront to all things holy, declaring scripture hate speech, prosecuting cake bakers, while giving a pass on high crimes by their own candidate, disastrous immigration, trade and Islamic terrorism policies that promote terrorism, even the White House infested with the Muslim Brotherhood, in spite of 9/11 and all the victims, healthcare premiums through the roof, lie after lie after lie, on and on it could go.
They can, in fact, defend nothing, any of the idiocy in either moral or practical terms. So, as always, they attack the messengers. It's all they can do here, skip on any substance that leaves their mouths hanging open or tongues stuttering, and go right for slander against the person who dares to bring some truth and sense to the table. They're really their own worst enemies, once a person gets wise to their lame tactics, moral and intellectual bankruptcy.
They can, in fact, defend nothing, any of the idiocy in either moral or practical terms. So, as always, they attack the messengers. It's all they can do here, skip on any substance that leaves their mouths hanging open or tongues stuttering, and go right for slander against the person who dares to bring some truth and sense to the table. They're really their own worst enemies, once a person gets wise to their lame tactics, moral and intellectual bankruptcy.
WonderfulLordJesus
New member
Does that make a fourth vote for Daffy Duck? Though anybody but Hillary is also a strong platform.
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
Something I've been watching unfold over the last year, and then recently saw put into print:
Drudge.
I'd mentioned to someone in real life how much power he had over the conservative news cycle, and how he didn't just aggregate news, he shaped the narrative in a powerful way. I've been reading Drudge daily since about 2002, so I've been watching for a long time how he does this. It's the way he writes his headlines, the way he posts the most unflattering photo of the person he doesn't like, how he never reports negatives on the ones he does like. He has a powerful thumb on the election scale. There's more I could say, but then I came across this article, written on July 18, and it does it better than I could have. The way it's a quid pro quo of Drudge posting an article and driving huge numbers to a website, and then that website beginning to tailor its writings so as to get another link from Drudge, which again drives their click rate through the roof. In this way, as the article states, it becomes "not Drudge reflecting where the public is," but the public subconsciously reflecting where Drudge is.
Drudge.
I'd mentioned to someone in real life how much power he had over the conservative news cycle, and how he didn't just aggregate news, he shaped the narrative in a powerful way. I've been reading Drudge daily since about 2002, so I've been watching for a long time how he does this. It's the way he writes his headlines, the way he posts the most unflattering photo of the person he doesn't like, how he never reports negatives on the ones he does like. He has a powerful thumb on the election scale. There's more I could say, but then I came across this article, written on July 18, and it does it better than I could have. The way it's a quid pro quo of Drudge posting an article and driving huge numbers to a website, and then that website beginning to tailor its writings so as to get another link from Drudge, which again drives their click rate through the roof. In this way, as the article states, it becomes "not Drudge reflecting where the public is," but the public subconsciously reflecting where Drudge is.
The man who could have stopped Donald Trump Republican strategist Rick Wilson, a member of the so-called Never Trump movement, said: "Matt's agenda-setting power on the right was on full display in this election cycle. The iron triangle of Drudge, Fox, and talk radio spent a year in pro-Trump lockstep, eliding over stories critical of Trump, and providing him with an ideological hall pass on his many, many, many transgressions from conservative doctrine." Wilson said that Drudge was, in effect, a kingmaker who used his agenda-setting power to "pick a winner" in Trump. |
I'm thinking... ....that you're the worst sort of woman, who loves lies if they are delivered well. Trump was honest, Hillary lied, and you liked Hillary's lies better than Trump's facts.
Yes, I'm thinking... ...that you epitomize all that's wrong with the low-information American public, who prefer ignorance and lies over the cold hard facts.
they are a joke
-nothing more and nothing less
-so here I am encouraging you
-shame on me
I'm looking forward to November.
Why, so that a majority of idiots and fools can elect a criminal liar and you can lock arms with them?
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
Too little, too late. We've already taken care of the thinking for you.
Toddle off now.
By the way, for the record: Trump's speech was far better than Hillary's for two simple reasons: It was the truth, and it was real.
Hillary's speech was the worn out tired old lies and cliches. Only a moron would have fallen for it.
Hillary's speech was the worn out tired old lies and cliches. Only a moron would have fallen for it.
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
Channeling Trump again?
"I'm the greatest, my speech was the best, I can afford to pay the best speechwriters, it was great, the response was huge, just huge. Everybody loved it. Everybody. Even Putin called to tell me I was the best. Have I told you Putin is a friend of mine?" *
*Satirical interpretation of CC/Trump
Thanks for posting that. Interesting article. I tend to agree with the more skeptical side of it though. I don't doubt Drudge helped Trump, but I hesitate to say much more. Trump seems impervious to criticism among his supporters. Coulter may be right that had Drudge taken a harder line against Trump that he simply would have lost traffic or support, not that Trump would have been hurt.
I used to browse Drudge a lot but rarely go there now. Not because of any dislike, it is more of a time management decision. Disappointing to learn that he's been a pro-Trumper.
3rd party voting. :devil:
Oh, well his *friendship* and encouragement of Putin must mean he is fit for office and trustworthy ............... :chuckle:
Daniel1769
New member
Trump and Clinton are equally horrible. They're both liberal Democrats. It doesn't matter who you vote for. You're supporting aleft wing liberal Democrat either way.
I have decided to vote for hillary
-if she agrees to a 21% pay cut
-I think she will to win
-it would also prove her point
-if she agrees to a 21% pay cut
-I think she will to win
-it would also prove her point
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
Thats ridiculous AND ignorant.
- Status