Democratic Election 2016 - Hillary Clinton Megathread [OFFICIAL]

[Felya]

....... The news will often not report things that are a detriment to their owners, thus the near silence on TPP or complete cheer leading of it. But yes, "everyone not me is a Christian Republican!" or something Lizzy the Lezy would say.

Why do you think TPP would benefit news station owners, more than Trump's proposed tax cut?

[Theodarzna]

Why do you think TPP would benefit news station owners, more than Trump's proposed tax cut?

I think TPP is of their benefit because most major telecommunications company's are lobbying for it. I do not know if they are making an Anti-Trump choice, but I find their total refusal to report on it and their balls deep constant and now deafening "DEA HATE TRUMP!?" Bandwagon somewhat disconcerting. It makes me suspect people are just going to elect Clinton without critically looking at what we are going to get.

[Cthulhu 2020]

....... The news will often not report things that are a detriment to their owners, thus the near silence on TPP or complete cheer leading of it. But yes, "everyone not me is a Christian Republican!" or something Lizzy the Lezy would say.

Who knows? Hillary herself seemed pretty determined to be against the TPP, but the list of politicians among the Democrats to pick for your administration who are against the TPP is vanishingly small, so I imagine she's definitely going to have a few pro TPP Democrats in her administration. The question is does she follow them on that issue, or is she going to keep her ADAMANTLY promised word to be against it, and not listen to them on it, and only listen to them on oh, hundreds of other issues.

[Damajin]

Why do you think TPP would benefit news station owners, more than Trump's proposed tax cut?

There's no way a tax cut is on the same scale of profitability as the TPP is. Since those media conglomerates also have huge stakes planted in other major industries that would be effected by the TPP they are in essence lobbying for their own returns, ones that would get exponentially larger the more markets opened up and also with the projected profits provision, near guaranteed. Those conglomerates are already doing everything they can to lower their tax burden, they want those markets opened and firmly in their sway.

[Felya]

I think TPP is of their benefit because most major telecommunications company's are lobbying for it. I do not know if they are making an Anti-Trump choice, but I find their total refusal to report on it and their balls deep constant and now deafening "DEA HATE TRUMP!?" Bandwagon somewhat disconcerting. It makes me suspect people are just going to elect Clinton without critically looking at what we are going to get.

But, your assertion is not asking to think critically. You are asking to assume, without justification. What TPP stories do not have and what Trump stories do have, is clicks and ratings. You are free to run with a convoluted conspiracy, which isn't even justified in her opponents actual policy. But, please realize that there is a much simpler... Much less sinister perspective... Clicks mean revenue...

- - - Updated - - -

There's no way a tax cut is on the same scale of profitability as the TPP is. Since those media conglomerates also have huge stakes planted in other major industries that would be effected by the TPP they are in essence lobbying for their own returns, ones that would get exponentially larger the more markets opened up and also with the projected profits provision, near guaranteed. Those conglomerates are already doing everything they can to lower their tax burden, they want those markets opened and firmly in their sway.

Which? How? Trump proposes a tax cut so low, that it makes current loopholes redundant. What exact media conglomerates are you talking about and what benefit would TTP provide? Please, no shadow organizations or illuminati...

[Vynestra]

To all the bernie bros I offended. I take back everything.

The trump supporters are so much worse. I just finished a twitter spam to one who was screaming "CLINTONS HEALTH, DEBATES, WIKILEAKS! AND SKEWED/RIGGED POLLS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

THE PUNDITS WERE WRONG IN THE PRIMARIES HE WON HE'LL DO IT AGAIN!!!

LET'S IGNORE THE FACT TRUMP WAS AHEAD IN 75% OF POLLS 1 MONTH AFTER THE CAMPAIGN STARTED, AND HE'S NOW LOSING IN ALL OF THEM, BUT WHO CARES ABOUT POLLS THEY SAID HE WOULD LOSE AND HE WON!!!!

I'm so over it. That logic is so dumb. When he was ahead in the primaries THEY LOVED the polls, now he's behind and they hate polls.


The general electorate hated trump since always, this isn't new. They're just blind.

[Theodarzna]

But, your assertion is not asking to think critically. You are asking to assume, without justification. What TPP stories do not have and what Trump stories do have, is clicks and ratings. You are free to run with a convoluted conspiracy, which isn't even justified in her opponents actual policy. But, please realize that there is a much simpler... Much less sinister perspective... Clicks mean revenue...

Which? How? Trump proposes a tax cut so low, that it makes current loopholes redundant. What exact media conglomerates are you talking about and what benefit would TTP provide? Please, no shadow organizations or illuminati...

Conspiracies? Sometimes called lunch were people chat and discuss ideas. It is not unreasonable to assume that for example someone OWNING a news outfit might try to influence the news, for example Shelden Adelson's ownership of the Los Vegas Review Journal and how its editorial staff must submit pieces related to him for special review. Are you calling it unreasonable to assume people owning papers won't use that to their advantage?

Considering its a thing that happens, perhaps maybe its not unreasonable to inquire why we continue to even talk about Trump when its basically a done fact that he won't be president.

[Felya]

Conspiracies? Sometimes called lunch were people chat and discuss ideas. It is not unreasonable to assume that for example someone OWNING a news outfit might try to influence the news, for example Shelden Adelson's ownership of the Los Vegas Review Journal and how its editorial staff must submit pieces related to him for special review. Are you calling it unreasonable to assume people owning papers won't use that to their advantage?

I am asking you what the advantage is. Shelden Adelson, due to the nature of his holdings, would benefit far more from Trump's tax cut, than anything to do with TTP. I am saying it is unreasonable to assume guilt, without evidance or even motive. You have provided neither...

Considering its a thing that happens, perhaps maybe its not unreasonable to inquire why we continue to even talk about Trump when its basically a done fact that he won't be president.

No, your only example is counter to your assertion. What thing happens?

[Theodarzna]

I am asking you what the advantage is. Shelden Adelson, due to the nature of his holdings, would benefit far more from Trump's tax cut, than anything to do with TTP. I am saying it is unreasonable to assume guilt, without evidance or even motive. You have provided neither...

No, your only example is counter to your assertion. What thing happens?

Well first, let us ask, Why do you keep mentioning Trump? He isn't going to be president, he is down 16 points in the polls and you ignore every other aspect of Trump that is making him a loose canon presidency choice.

TPP on the other hand grants incredible IP rights, in many ways it is CISPA and SOPA on steroids. Already right there the big telecoms, mainly Viacom, Time Warner, ect benefit immensely from this new statutory system in ways Trump's "tax cuts," cannot compare. Trump will not grant such incredible giveaway's in Intellectual Property Law, Hillary? Well...... she may or may not. But considering all these forces are backing her and so many believe she will go balls deep for TPP, I suspect Viacom knows its happening under Hillary.

So right there, the big Telecoms get a massive amount of power,

TPP proposes that copyright would apply to temporary copies that computers and networks create. The United States looks like a bully, as there are brackets throughout the incomplete agreement noting objections by various countries. “TPP would make even the transient copies of works made as they pass over the Internet, or stored in a computer's RAM, all subject to copyright,” wrote Glyn Moody. “That would mean that everyone would need to get permission from copyright holders to download or even view any copyright work. TPP is “trying to make the entire Internet a permission-based system.”

It will irrevocably change the internet and become law of the land all without a democratic vote. Now, sure, Trump might grant tax cuts, but how many of these major corporations even pay taxes that the plebs pay?

[Felya]

Well first, let us ask, Why do you keep mentioning Trump? He isn't going to be president, he is down 16 points in the polls and you ignore every other aspect of Trump that is making him a loose canon presidency choice.

This is silly. If you believe that Hillary will win, why the fuck is the media still pushing for it? The fact that your theory falls apart if one assumes Hilkary's victory, doesn't help your point. Remember, just because you don't say the word Trump, doesn't mean that campaign contributions and lobbying is to assist versus another's victory. The fact that Trump would provide more benefit to those you claim support Hillary to their benefit, counters the entire motive of your assertion. Leaving you without motive or evidance.

So, yeah, tell me more about this media supporting Hillary over [shall not be named] in their lobbying and donations, while claiming mentioning [shall not be named] doesn't mater. You are doing exactly what you accuse media of doing, but don't have an obvious and direct link to profit, that link clicks do.

TPP on the other hand grants incredible IP rights, in many ways it is CISPA and SOPA on steroids. Already right there the big telecoms, mainly Viacom, Time Warner, ect benefit immensely from this new statutory system in ways Trump's "tax cuts," cannot compare. Trump will not grant such incredible giveaway's in Intellectual Property Law, Hillary? Well...... she may or may not. But considering all these forces are backing her and so many believe she will go balls deep for TPP, I suspect Viacom knows its happening under Hillary.

And what exactly has IP rights done to music on the Internet? What exact and direct benefit would result to these companies? How exactly is that going to surpass the exact tax loopholes that are actually the issue with TPP and is part of Trump's proposal?

So right there, the big Telecoms get a massive amount of power,

Power they actually already have? You think press media cannot do exactly what music has been doing? Why is that exactly?

It will irrevocably change the internet and become law of the land all without a democratic vote. Now, sure, Trump might grant tax cuts, but how many of these major corporations even pay taxes that the plebs pay?

Tell that to napster... You do understand that the low taxes they pay are due to the very loopholes Trump claims would be redundant?

[Damajin]

Which? How? Trump proposes a tax cut so low, that it makes current loopholes redundant. What exact media conglomerates are you talking about and what benefit would TTP provide? Please, no shadow organizations or illuminati...

Those media conglomerates. Here's some examples of what other assets they own that are impacted by TPP:

GE: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...neral_Electric
News Corp: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...d_by_News_Corp
Disney: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...wned_by_Disney
Viacom: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...wned_by_Viacom
Time Warner: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...by_Time_Warner
CBS: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...s_owned_by_CBS

As you can see, it's not just media companies they own or have stakes in, but everything from energy, healthcare, communications, real estate, financial investing firms along with general entertainment. This says nothing to individual executives and well compensated employees, their families and their own personal investments, nor in the general interest of large media corporations in supporting and bulwarking a strong corporate atmosphere as it increases the frequency of use and raises the cost of advertising on those networks. It's pretty safe to say that the media corporations are always going to want strong and steady growth amongst those who'd naturally seek them out to buy time on their airwaves, digital and print platforms. Moreover as we learned from the Robber Baron days it has always been in the interest of the corporate big shots to either have a working relationship with or outright control media companies in whatever form they exist in at the time, as that media can be used to shape and mold public opinion on topics and issues they'd want favorable public opinion on, and TPP cases and the TPP in general is definitely a ready example of that.

There's no tax cut that can compete with the scaling profits of the TPP, as I said these corporations are already hiding so much cash offshore to avoid paying taxes on it and engaging in every kind of deal both brokered and shady to reduce their tax burden as much as possible that year to year there's more money to be made from TPP chicanery than there ever could be saved by lowering taxes that are already being skimmed and slimmed down to nothing.

[zenkai]

"You're brainwashed if you don't think a third party option is viable!"

Always said by someone who either knows a strong third party vote will ensure the candidate they're voting for will win, or a person who really wants third party candidate to win when they can't.

Why are you replying to something I wrote a week ago... Did it take you that long to come up with this?

- - - Updated - - -

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/...ns-one-n636786

Hillary Blasts For-Profit Colleges, but Bill Took Millions From One

According to tax returns released by the Clinton campaign, the Clintons earned a total $22 million from for-profit education companies. Laureate's paychecks to Bill Clinton made up the bulk of that, with $17.6 million going to Clinton in his role as honorary chancellor from 2010 to 2015. He quit that role 12 days before Hillary Clinton announced her run for president. A spokesperson told NBC News Tuesday that his five-year contract expired at that time.

[Theodarzna]

And what exactly has IP rights done to music on the Internet? What exact and direct benefit would result to these companies? How exactly is that going to surpass the exact tax loopholes that are actually the issue with TPP and is part of Trump's proposal?

I get the strong feeling you are being disingenuous. Tax loopholes on taxes that aren't even paid is just useless.

The TPP would let corporations monitor our online activities, cut off our Internet access, delete content and impose fines. TPP proposes that copyright would apply to temporary copies that computers and networks create. Since ISPs could be held liable for copyright infringement they will have to come down and essentially block anything possibly dangerous. Where it concerns the Internet and digital content, much of the TPP intellectual property chapter looks like a cut-and-paste from ACTA. While explaining secondary liability due to indirect copyright infringement, Dr. Monica Horten, a fellow at the London School of Economics & Political Science pointed out that the U.S. wants ISPs to be copyright cops responsible “for removing copyright content from the Internet,” or else the ISPs would be liable. TPP “calls for disconnection of users (termination of Internet accounts), blocking and disabling of content, and even some level of monitoring obligation. The US/Australian proposal seeks to include search engines, linking sites" and maybe even cloud computing services. "It sounds to me like a description of a 3 strikes regime." she said.

Now, if you don't see the immediate pay off of that sort of power, and notice that Viacom and Time Warner back the deal it is not hard to envision that such forces would want their properties to tow the party line.

Tell that to napster... You do understand that the low taxes they pay are due to the very loopholes Trump claims would be redundant?

...... And what presidents have given those loopholes? Obama, Bush and Clinton (bill) so why care that yet another one is promising them some further tax breaks when they don't even pay taxes typically anymore.

[Shalcker]

Haven't seen this here...

[Cthulhu 2020]

Why are you replying to something I wrote a week ago... Did it take you that long to come up with this?

I don't spend every day of my existence debating politics.

[zenkai]

I don't spend every day of my existence debating politics.

So you have been off this site for a week?

[Cthulhu 2020]

Haven't seen this here...

So it seems this was temporarily used as a slide in training for a couple of months, and Clinton was an example of "how not to handle information", i.e. do not use your own personal email for US Army communication.

- - - Updated - - -

So you have been off this site for a week?

I have to check every single thread every time I visit MMOC? Are you feeling that neglected zenkai?


My point still stands. The primary elections are the place for people to get their third party votes out. If you want a third party to win, express it in the primary. Our general election process exists in such a way and works in a way that having more than two candidates running in it makes it unnecessarily long and convoluted to do if the votes are spread out.

I just find it funny that all of the Trump supporters who called Bernie/Stein dirty communists during the primaries are now crying big crocodile tears of concern for how Bernie was treated, and urging all Bernie voters to vote for him... as if it wasn't obvious that they wanted to split the Democratic votes for Trump's advantage.

[Dystemper]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016...legrounds.html

Hillary Clinton’s post-convention bounce may be coming back down to earth – at least in some parts of the country – as new polls show a tightening race against Donald Trump in several battleground states, especially when Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson is factored in.

A Monmouth University Poll released Wednesday showed Clinton holding onto just a 2-point lead in North Carolina.

She leads Trump 44-42 percent in the state, while Johnson is pulling 7 percent. The poll also shows Trump with a double-digit lead among independents.

North Carolina is one of several battleground states considered critical to Trump’s hopes of capturing the presidency in November. He still trails in most swing state polls, but the latest from Monmouth University marks an improvement over a recent NBC News/Wall Street Journal/Marist survey showing him down by 9 points in the state.

“North Carolina has given us tight presidential races over the last two cycles and this year appears to be no different,” Patrick Murray, director of the Monmouth University Polling Institute, said in a statement.

Meanwhile, another poll released Wednesday, by Florida Atlantic University, showed Trump leading by 2 points in Florida, 43-41 percent. Just last week, Monmouth University showed Trump down by 9 points in the state.
2016 Election Headquarters

The latest headlines on the 2016 elections from the biggest name in politics.
See Latest Coverage →

And a separate Monmouth University Poll released Monday showed Clinton holding a 4-point lead over Trump in Ohio. The survey likewise showed Johnson, who is expected to appear on the state’s ballot, pulling a sizable amount of support, with 10 percent.

Trump still has a long way to go in the polls, considering Clinton has a far more substantial lead in swing states like Pennsylvania and Virginia.

But the slight movement in his favor comes as the Republican presidential nominee has been barnstorming the country at rallies, town halls and fundraisers – yet Clinton has mostly stuck exclusively to private fundraisings events over the past week.

She was making a swing Wednesday through Silicon Valley to raise cash, while Trump was holding rallies in Florida and Mississippi.

Trump has been hammering Clinton at these stops over a string of reports about the overlap between the Clinton Foundation and State Department under her tenure. Most recently, the Associated Press reported Tuesday that more than half of the people outside government who met with Clinton while she was secretary of state gave money to the foundation.

"It is impossible to figure out where the Clinton Foundation ends and where the State Department begins," Trump told supporters in Austin on Tuesday night.

The Clinton campaign countered that the AP report “relies on utterly flawed data” and “cherry-picked a limited subset of Secretary Clinton's schedule to give a distorted portrayal of how often she crossed paths with individuals connected to charitable donations to the Clinton Foundation.”

The latest Monmouth University Poll in North Carolina was conducted Aug. 20-23. The poll of 401 likely voters in the state had a margin of error of 4.9 percentage points. __________________________________________


With Questions about Hillarys health beinghammered at, her taking a long break and not really campaigning she is not looking like the shoe in many had said. Plus no one is factoring in the support Trump has with voters who have not voted in several elections or ever. You even have Michael Moore now saying Trump will win. Johnson could end up being the spoiler for Clinton that torpedoes her chances.

[Gray_Matter]

Anyone voting for Clinton doesn't care about corruption or bad ethics, they're perfectly fine with it or they wouldn't be voting for her.

Ok, let me turn that around for you.

Lets say that you have a choice between a convicted drug king pin and a person with a DUI for mayor of a small town. Your mothers friend is also running for the post and you know there is no way your mother friend will win.

Who do you vote for? If you vote for the DUI guy then I could say that you don't care about DUI's. If you and enough others vote for your mothers friend then there is a good chance that the drug king pin wins.

In this situation, it's a given that your mom's friend can't win which is the case in the general election.

The point is that often you vote because one person isn't as bad as the other. It doesn't mean that you like that person. It means that you logically weigh up what is worse for you and vote to minimize that. It's the only logical answer.

Of course, you can stick to your ideals and vote for your mothers friend but then you can't complain when you end up with the drug king pin in charge of your area.

[Cthulhu 2020]

Ok, let me turn that around for you.

Lets say that you have a choice between a convicted drug king pin and a person with a DUI for mayor of a small town. Your mothers friend is also running for the post and you know there is no way your mother friend will win.

Who do you vote for? If you vote for the DUI guy then I could say that you don't care about DUI's. If you and enough others vote for your mothers friend then there is a good chance that the drug king pin wins.

In this situation, it's a given that your mom's friend can't win which is the case in the general election.

The point is that often you vote because one person isn't as bad as the other. It doesn't mean that you like that person. It means that you logically weigh up what is worse for you and vote to minimize that. It's the only logical answer.

Of course, you can stick to your ideals and vote for your mothers friend but then you can't complain when you end up with the drug king pin in charge of your area.

I wouldn't try too hard with Zenkai, he tries to project what he believes is what you believe or are saying into your posts and play forum gotcha trying to find some kind of mistake or hypocrisy on your part so he can go GOTCHA. But most of the time it does rely on him projecting his own interpretation on it.