2016 Election -- Part II
Poll
 | 57 votes (47.89%) | ||
| | 33 votes (27.73%) | ||
| | 12 votes (10.08%) | ||
| | 10 votes (8.4%) | ||
| | 4 votes (3.36%) | ||
| | 3 votes (2.52%) |
119 members have voted
As our nation is going to soundly reject Trump and his moronic views, its not we who need to do any soul searching, its Gods Own Party that gave us Trump and went down in flames alongside him. Perhaps the leadership will wake up and finally realize playing to the fears of an ever shrinking portion of the population is not how to win national elections.
Do you really think either party will support anything they perceive as taking away their power?
...and not answered...
Quote: billryanIt doesn't say anything about our nation. It accurately depicts the approx. 15% of the nation who votes in Republican primaries., many of whom are afraid to leaved their homes without a gun.
As our nation is going to soundly reject Trump and his moronic views, its not we who need to do any soul searching, its Gods Own Party that gave us Trump and went down in flames alongside him. Perhaps the leadership will wake up and finally realize playing to the fears of an ever shrinking portion of the population is not how to win national elections.
The Democrats may well win. They may even take the Senate. Do you think they will do anything about the money or gerrymandering issues?
National election results since 1980 are 5-5. In the past four elections, 2-2.
The trends may favor Democrats winning now more than they have, but I hardly think it is time to panic. Some do, of course. Regroup and move forward.
Panic is always what the Dems say that Republicans should do...
Eff the parties, both of them. I keep listening for someone to say something about helping the country that DOES NOT help one of the parties.
Stop the presses, I might have missed something. Is Trump having a bit of dificullty with the 'Republican' party.
That's OK with me, I have a bit of difficulty with them both as well. Just 2F
Hey, don't be bringing the country into this. That is still several elections away.Quote: TwoFeathersATLMe thinks Both parties are a bit worried, been an unusual cycle to put it mildly.
Eff the parties, both of them. I keep listening for someone to say something about helping the country that DOES NOT help one of the parties.
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/
Lots of fun stuff to play around with there.
They currently give Hillary an 80% chance of winning in November.
And yes, they were wrong about Trump during the primaries. They address that here:
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/donald-trump-has-a-20-percent-chance-of-becoming-president/
Maybe not so trusty if you mean the biased yo-yo who is 0 for 7 on pronouncements regarding Trump:Quote: ams288Nate Silver & FiveThirtyEight have fired up their trusty election forecaster.
“Because he’s ‘not really a Republican’
Prognosticator Nate Silver remarked in mid-September that Trump would not be the nominee because he is “not really a Republican.”
“He's very far to the right on immigration, but he also wants socialized medicine,” Silver said, according to Business Insider’s account. “He wants to tax the rich, right? There’s an alternate reality in which he decided to run as a Democrat instead — he wouldn’t have to change his policy positions all that much.” —politico
“His basic error was to downplay the incoming evidence from the pollsters, whose business is based on talking to voters, and to assume that Trump’s steady lead wouldn’t result in his winning the nomination. . .
"Silver argued that the surveys showing Trump well ahead of his rivals didn’t have much predictive value because most G.O.P. primary voters hadn’t made up their minds. He also said that “nobody remotely like Trump has won a major-party nomination in the modern era.” —New Yorker
June 16 -Trump Isn’t a Real Candidate
July 16 - Reasons Not To Take Trump ‘Surge’ Seriously
July 20 - Trump Is World’s Greatest Troll
Aug. 6 -Trump’s 6 Stages of Doom
Aug. 11 - Trump Is Winning Polls, And Losing Nomination
Nov. 23 - Dear Media, Stop Freaking Out About Trump’s Polls
Feb. 2 - Trump Comes Out Of Iowa Looking Like Pat Buchanan dc
Quote: SanchoPanzaMaybe not so trusty if you mean the biased yo-yo who is 0 for 7 on pronouncements regarding Trump:
Maybe go ahead and read the article I posted where he addresses all of that?
I'm glad you wasted your time and googled all that though...
Please: go ahead and bet on Nate Silver being wrong all election season.
Election night will just be that much satisfying for the rest of us who are living in reality... just like 2012.
Only people who don't give a damn about their personal information use Google.Quote: ams288I'm glad you wasted your time and googled all that though....
""It would be difficult to imagine a less flattering from-the-gut reaction to Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton," said Tim Malloy, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Poll. "
"Democrat Hillary Clinton has 42 percent to Republican Donald Trump's 40 percent - too close to call - as American voters say neither candidate would be a good president and that the campaign has increased hatred and prejudice in the nation, according to a Quinnipiac University National poll released today.
This compares to results of a June 1 national poll by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN- uh-pe-ack) University, showing Clinton edging Trump 45 - 41 percent. "
http://www.qu.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2363
My takeaway is the same as what I have been saying for a while...we have two shitty candidates for President. Two. Not one.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/nc/north_carolina_trump_vs_clinton-5538.html
Obama won NC in 2008, lost it in 2012.
Interesting.
Quote: billryanIt doesn't say anything about our nation. It accurately depicts the approx. 15% of the nation who votes in Republican primaries., many of whom are afraid to leaved their homes without a gun.
As our nation is going to soundly reject Trump and his moronic views, its not we who need to do any soul searching, its Gods Own Party that gave us Trump and went down in flames alongside him. Perhaps the leadership will wake up and finally realize playing to the fears of an ever shrinking portion of the population is not how to win national elections.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/foreign-politicians-trump-stop-begging-money-215745992--election.html
Few sample comments of readers from the link above:
michael k
This is what is wrong with "Money is free speech. By hook or by #$%$, money from foreign entities creeps into our system, and has sway over elected representatives here. This ruling by the SC has got to be the worst one ever thought up by the right leaning court, and when Hillery appoints the next two or three judges for the court, maybe they will come to the same conclusion. Money is the root of all evil in the U.S. electoral system, and should be limited, or eliminated, by public funded campaigns, where everybody gets just exactly the same amount of money to run in the national election.
I'm sure we will hear Trump talk about this poll a lot at his rallies, while ignoring literally every other poll from the last month.
He hasn't been able to constantly brag about his polls lately like he did during the primaries...
Was it a booty call? maybe she is doing the Monica on him?
Is she a possible VP candidate?
Maybe he was promising a SC nomination?
Oh yeah...there is nothing to see folks, please move along,
Quote: RonCGee, Loretta Lynch met with Bill Clinton and they didn't want anyone to know about it.
Was it a booty call? maybe she is doing the Monica on him?
Is she a possible VP candidate?
Maybe he was promising a SC nomination?
Oh yeah...there is nothing to see folks, please move along,
You're about two days too late on this one.
But yes, correct. Nothing to see here.
Quote: ams288You're about two days too late on this one.
I hadn't noticed it posted and it is relevant to the the past and potential future first family, so I posted it. If someone else it the issue, I apologize.
Quote: ams288But yes, correct. Nothing to see here.
I would be shocked if you answered any other way.
Heard a guest on Rush's program today ( he normally doesn't do the guest thing). ex-Justice dept guy apparently. The guests's opinion was that just by meeting with Bill, hanging with Bill, Loretta sent a msg to all the little underlings in Justice, and the investigators in the FBI, sent them a clear msg just where she stands. Seemed like a threat perhaps. Said it wasn't an accident, said it was intentional. I am not familiar with the guest, ( I was just driving to Costco ), he may be a nut case. But he didn't sound like a nut case, didn't sound nutty at all....Quote: ams288You're about two days too late on this one.
But yes, correct. Nothing to see here.
Quote: TwoFeathersATLHeard a guest on Rush's program today ( he normally doesn't do the guest thing). ex-Justice dept guy apparently. The guests's opinion was that just by meeting with Bill, hanging with Bill, Loretta sent a msg to all the little underlings in Justice, and the investigators in the FBI, sent them a clear msg just where she stands. Seemed like a threat perhaps. Said it wasn't an accident, said it was intentional. I am not familiar with the guest, ( I was just driving to Costco ), he may be a nut case. But he didn't sound like a nut case, didn't sound nutty at all....
The fact that he willingly guested on Rush's program today is enough to make him sound nutty to me.
In all seriousness, who cares? Loretta Lynch said today she will follow the FBI's recommendation in regards to the email issue. End of story.
Either Hillary gets indicted, or (much more likely) she doesn't. The Clinton smear machine is already trying to muddy the water for when she doesn't get indicted.... we all know they will never let it go if she doesn't. Average Americans will move on and focus on issues that actually matter in their daily lives. But there will always be the "Hillary is a criminal" fringe and they will just have to be ignored and mocked.
Well if clandestine sessions between the top law enforcement officer and a probable witness, if not defendant, on the tarmac aren't enough, the main target of the two criminal investigations is supposedly going to be interviewed by the F.B.I. on Saturday. Push may just be coming to shove.Quote: RonCOh yeah...there is nothing to see folks, please move along,
Quote: ams288
In all seriousness, who cares? Loretta Lynch said today she will follow the FBI's recommendation in regards to the email issue. End of story.
It's not clear to me if she would have options to follow some recommendations and not others, but that announcement is essentially, I'm going to follow recommendations.
Seems to me the meeting probably did nothing but make it possibly worse for Clinton if that's the case.
Quote: RonCAnyone care to set an over/under on the number of times Hillary invokes the 5th?
Will we even know? I doubt it will be a public interview.
I know you think you just deflected that and moved on. That seems to be what you do, which is cool with me I guess. I am not a Trump fan. Let me capitalize for emphasis I AM NOT A TRUMP FAN. Are you actually a Hillary fan, or a Dem Party fan? Serious question, but of course you don't have to reply, either way. I was hoping that someone read what I posted and wondered about the questions asked. Your response was expected, and you came thru. That response however did not address the questions so much as deflect them, which everyone seems to do here, which amazes me.Quote: ams288The fact that he willingly guested on Rush's program today is enough to make him sound nutty to me.
In all seriousness, who cares? Loretta Lynch said today she will follow the FBI's recommendation in regards to the email issue. End of story.
Either Hillary gets indicted, or (much more likely) she doesn't. The Clinton smear machine is already trying to muddy the water for when she doesn't get indicted.... we all know they will never let it go if she doesn't. Average Americans will move on and focus on issues that actually matter in their daily lives. But there will always be the "Hillary is a criminal" fringe and they will just have to be ignored and mocked.
I have to vote in Nov. I have to make a choice. So far, in spite of your constant posting that seems to support one side, I have found only a small amount of serious thought revealed in your posts. I am a bigot, I am a racist, I try to improve myself as I go. Could you help me with some of your insight? I strongly suspect you have it in you to explain your positions, can you explain them to 2F? No Smiley here.
Quote: SanchoPanzaWell if clandestine sessions between the top law enforcement officer and a probable witness
It wasn't clandestine at all. It's been a pretty open fact that they met, and they even said what they talked about. Whether or not they should have met in the first place is up for discussion, but the fact is there was nothing secretive about it. Hell, if they wanted to keep it a secret, why not just a late night phone call? Or even a top secret meeting in person somewhere? They're some of the most powerful people in the country right now; I wouldn't think it would be too hard to arrange something TRULY clandestine.
Quote: RonCAnyone care to set an over/under on the number of times Hillary invokes the 5th?
I don't know... I think she's a master of rhetoric. I think she'll just try to spin her way out of the touchy questions as opposed to just avoiding them.
http://www.npr.org/2016/06/30/484192533/bipartisan-disapproval-follows-bill-clintons-meeting-with-loretta-lynch
I guess at least a few on the Democrat side recognize this is bad look.
They both can say what they talked about in a "private" meeting but, since it was "private", how can we know that? They could have a brief PUBLIC meeting where people could hear them talking and then we would know.
Also, no pictures allowed? If that is true, someone knew it was a bad look and tried to suppress it.
It sure as shooting was clandestine. No announcement whatsoever before or after. Then the F.B.I. enforced no photos, no cameras, no tape, no anything. It became news only because on airport worker leaked it to a local reporter for the ABC affiliate in Phoenix. And as for what they said they talked about, they said it was their grandchildren. If anyone thinks that that explanation is any better than discussing the weather, we have bridges to sell all over the U.S.Quote: TigerWuIt wasn't clandestine at all. It's been a pretty open fact that they met, and they even said what they talked about.
Quote: SanchoPanzaIt sure as shooting was clandestine. No announcement whatsoever before or after. Then the F.B.I. enforced no photos, no cameras, no tape, no anything. It became news only because on airport worker leaked it to a local reporter for the ABC affiliate in Phoenix. And as for what they said they talked about, they said it was their grandchildren. If anyone thinks that that explanation is any better than discussing the weather, we have bridges to sell all over the U.S.
In a completely obvious case of corruption, in spite of what may or most likely may not come of this, at least (at the very least) the right gets to laugh for a bit at those dems with their heads in the sand. Babs, terapined, ... somebody grab me the popcorn(as you two say so often).
I seriously want to know what the righties think Bill said to her. What power does he have over her?
Quote: ams288What do you think they actually talked about, if it wasn't their grandchildren, Janet Reno, etc.?
I seriously want to know what the righties think Bill said to her. What power does he have over her?
Do you think it was a good idea for this meeting to have taken place?
I'll be damned if you're too (blank) to figure out this doesn't look good to anybody with half a brain. Bill Clinton is not that stupid. Neither is Lynch. But F÷=% them! They got caught HIDING a private meeting when his wife is under investigation by her in the national spotlight. When you buy a house, you don't negotiate with the sellers agent. That's your realtors job. Somebody can help me with a better analogy. Tell me, would it have been alright for Hillary herself to have this supposed idle chit chat with her? No, just no.
What do you, AMS, honestly believe they met about?
Quote: TwoFeathersATLI know you think you just deflected that and moved on. That seems to be what you do, which is cool with me I guess. I am not a Trump fan. Let me capitalize for emphasis I AM NOT A TRUMP FAN. Are you actually a Hillary fan, or a Dem Party fan? Serious question, but of course you don't have to reply, either way. I was hoping that someone read what I posted and wondered about the questions asked. Your response was expected, and you came thru. That response however did not address the questions so much as deflect them, which everyone seems to do here, which amazes me.
I have to vote in Nov. I have to make a choice. So far, in spite of your constant posting that seems to support one side, I have found only a small amount of serious thought revealed in your posts. I am a bigot, I am a racist, I try to improve myself as I go. Could you help me with some of your insight? I strongly suspect you have it in you to explain your positions, can you explain them to 2F? No Smiley here.
2f typing a ton to simply say - you didn't answer my question
anyway
to the subject of what was discussed on the plane
I'm sure it went something like this
Bill-A lot is at stake for this country. Trump is a dumb stupid bigot and a racist a-hole.
Lynch-I hear you
Bill-Bye
Quote: terapined
to the subject of what was discussed on the plane
I'm sure it went something like this
Bill-A lot is at stake for this country. Trump is a dumb stupid bigot and a racist a-hole.
Lynch-I hear you
Bill-Bye
Are you okay with the implications of the type of conversation that you are speaking about above?
Not that we will ever know because the Democrats are so freaking transparent in everything they do since their fearless leader said that he would have the most transparent administration in history...but that kind of conversation would be like saying--
BC = Loretta, you do understand that there is a lot at stake here. We can't let Trump become President; there can be no indictment of Hillary or anyone close to her.
LL = Bill, I get it! I am not going to let that happen.
That would be a reason for a private meeting and no pictures.
Loretta Lynch should not have allowed the meeting to happen. She is the office holder here; it is up to her to defend the integrity of her office.
Whether there is anything to the email server thing or not, the Department of State and all others handling the emails (so, basically, this administration) is stonewalling the release of the emails by saying they can only do a few hundred releases a month. C'mon. First of all, most of them probably say nothing; others are likely parts of email chains that can be scrubbed fairly quickly as a group. What have the committed to the effort, one person?
If what was in those emails would help their case, I assure you the release would be much, much quicker. Let's say no classified or scandalous information, or very little of it, is in the emails--which is what we have been told. If that was really the case, get them out as quick as possible. Take a hit here and there for it, and they go away by the end of the summer.
Will any Democrat here say that the Democrats would be all over any Republican administration handling things the same way this one is handling the whole Clinton thing? I include Clinton in this; she was part of the administration.
Quote: RonCDo you think it was a good idea for this meeting to have taken place?
No I don't think it was a good idea. I blame Bill.
But I also don't think they had some secret discussion about the email server issue. I know there are plenty here who do think that.
Yesterday during her interview, Loretta Lynch was asked if there is anything she wishes Eric Holder would have told her about before she assumed the AG role, her response: "Where the lock on the plane door is." That made me LOL.
Quote: ams288No I don't think it was a good idea. I blame Bill.
But I also don't think they had some secret discussion about the email server issue. I know there are plenty here who do think that.
Yesterday during her interview, Loretta Lynch was asked if there is anything she wishes Eric Holder would have told her about before she assumed the AG role, her response: "Where the lock on the plane door is." That made me LOL.
It doesn't matter what they discussed. The more I think about it, the less it matters. The appearance of impropriety is the issue.
The head law enforcement officer of the land met privately with the husband of the woman who is at the center of the most visible investigation currently in progress.
I think Loretta Lynch should be fired or resign. I just can't see how this is acceptable behavior in this situation. Even if they only discussed their grand kids or blow jobs.
I know the same people will say the same stupid shit about it is not all that bad, blah blah blah....my questions is this--if you don't think this approaches a resignation/firing situation, what does for your party? Is it that much about party to you?
Quote: RonCIt doesn't matter what they discussed. The more I think about it, the less it matters. The appearance of impropriety is the issue.
The head law enforcement officer of the land met privately with the husband of the woman who is at the center of the most visible investigation currently in progress.
I think Loretta Lynch should be fired or resign. I just can't see how this is acceptable behavior in this situation. Even if they only discussed their grand kids or blow jobs.
I know the same people will say the same stupid shit about it is not all that bad, blah blah blah....my questions is this--if you don't think this approaches a resignation/firing situation, what does for your party? Is it that much about party to you?
I don't think it even comes close to a firing/resign situation.
It's not even about party. She will follow the FBI's recommendation. End of story.
Quote: ams288I don't think it even comes close to a firing/resign situation.
It's not even about party. She will follow the FBI's recommendation. End of story.
I think we set the bar way too low for the performance of our public officials.
Quote: RonCI think we set the bar way too low for the performance of our public officials.
Yes. God forbid public officials be allowed to talk to each other.
You announce "End of Story" alot. Sounds like wishful thinking.Quote: ams288I don't think it even comes close to a firing/resign situation.
It's not even about party. She will follow the FBI's recommendation. End of story.
The point I was trying to make was that I heard J. Christian Adams propose an explanation of the 'meeting' on Rush's show yesterday which sounded very plausible. I don't generally listen there, just was on my news channel on a brief ride to the store, since a little Rush, infrequently, is about as much as I can handle. I didn't catch the guys name so I just looked it up on Rush's web site under archives. Was the first thing that popped up. I'm hesitant to be linking to Rush's site here (joke, pls) but you can find it as well if you like. Sounded very plausible, and the guy is an insider in the world of political intrigue and nuance.
His point was that Lynch was sending a msg to the career guys/gals at Justice and the FBI. He made the point rather eloquently, IMO.
Quote: ams288Yes. God forbid public officials be allowed to talk to each other.
Bill Clinton is not just "any" public official. He is the husband of the woman at the center of a criminal investigation. The person he met with is the one who gets to decide what happens once the FBI recommendations land on her desk. What if it isn't cut and dry, but the FBI is 51%/49% that a crime occurred and could be prosecuted? They aren't sure of a conviction but sure something criminal happened? The police arrest people all the time. DA's have to make decisions on whether to prosecute or not.
You conveniently ignore the fact that they weren't forced to meet; the meeting could have been avoided...unlike some function where both are invited. No, they made a choice to meet. Geniuses should know to avoid situations like this. Clinton should be smart enough to know that it wasn't a good look for Lynch; he helped put her in a bad spot. I guess he does that to a lot of woman.
Quote: TwoFeathersATLYou announce "End of Story" alot. Sounds like wishful thinking.
Because it IS the end of story.
Righties will continue to whine and say why this is evidence of ..... blah blah blah.
But in the end, Lynch will remain AG. Hillary either will or (more likely) will not be indicted.
And in a few days, no one will be talking about this meeting other than those people who are convinced the Clintons are evil murderers.
Quote: ams288Because it IS the end of story.
And in a few days, no one will be talking about this meeting other than those people who are convinced the Clintons are evil murderers.
I searched for 'Clinton's are evil murderers'.
Apparently the story continues.... ;-)
Quote: ams288Because it IS the end of story.
Of course! Deny, delay, deflect...
Quote: ams288And in a few days, no one will be talking about this meeting other than those people who are convinced the Clintons are evil murderers.
No, the people who are convinced the Clintons are crooked will continue to talk about it. For example, well, me...I do not think they murdered anyone. I do think they lie and cheat to get ahead.
I don't like Trump. I don't like the Clintons. I'm not delusional about the issues, though, and I am willing to say that we have put forth terrible candidates. On both sides.
Maybe he really is auditioning to be the next Hitler?
Quote: RonCIt doesn't matter what they discussed. The more I think about it, the less it matters. The appearance of impropriety is the issue.
I agree.
But for all we know, Lynch said to Bill, "Dude... your wife is f***ed. There's no way she's getting out of this." I mean, they've been friends for decades; she might have been just giving him a friendly heads up that his wife is going to prison and Trump is going to be the next president.
Quote:if you don't think this approaches a resignation/firing situation, what does for your party? Is it that much about party to you?
I'm not a Democrat, so I don't care about party, and even I don't think this is worth a firing or resignation. At worst she just needs to be completely removed from this specific investigation. Which, now that I think about it, she probably shouldn't even have been involved in the first place since they're such close friends.
Quote: ams288
In other news, Donald Trump made on oopsie today and tweeted a picture of "Crooked Hillary" with the caption "Most corrupt candidate ever!" written inside a Jewish star.
In front of a giant backdrop of money, no less.
Quote: RonC
The head law enforcement officer of the land met privately with the husband of the woman who is at the center of the most visible investigation currently in progress.
I think Loretta Lynch should be fired or resign. I just can't see how this is acceptable behavior in this situation. Even if they only discussed their grand kids or blow jobs.
On the flip side
The head law enforcement officer in the state of Florida was investigating Trump U
She asks Trump for a donation
Trump make a 25k donation to officer
Officer drops case
Its obvious corruption
http://www.wftv.com/news/politics/attorney-calls-for-bribery-investigation-of-florida-attorney-general-bondi-over-trump-donation/374891527
Quote: TigerWuBut for all we know, Lynch said to Bill, "Dude... your wife is f***ed. There's no way she's getting out of this." I mean, they've been friends for decades; she might have been just giving him a friendly heads up that his wife is going to prison and Trump is going to be the next president.
In this case, I'd say Bernie Sanders or Joe Biden would still have a better chance at becoming the next President than Trump. Hell, Hillary's negatives are pretty bad... One of those two would be welcomed with open arms by most people.
Wouldn't that be satisfying: Republicans have tried so hard to smear the Clintons for years, and in the end it worked for them. And President Bernie Sanders gets elected as a result.... That'd be delicious.
Quote: terapinedOn the flip side
The head law enforcement officer in the state of Florida was investigating Trump U
She asks Trump for a donation
Trump make a 25k donation to officer
Officer drops case
Its obvious corruption
http://www.wftv.com/news/politics/attorney-calls-for-bribery-investigation-of-florida-attorney-general-bondi-over-trump-donation/374891527
Investigate and prosecute.
I have no problem with doing that, be it a Republican, Democrat, or whatever Trump is...
Quote: ams288In this case, I'd say Bernie Sanders or Joe Biden would still have a better chance at becoming the next President than Trump. Hell, Hillary's negatives are pretty bad... One of those two would be welcomed with open arms by most people.
Wouldn't that be satisfying: Republicans have tried so hard to smear the Clintons for years, and in the end it worked for them. And President Bernie Sanders gets elected as a result.... That'd be delicious.
Heck, that is good enough to even be a potential strategy....
The attacks against Clinton helped get us Obama...could that kind of thing happen again?
Quote: ams288Wouldn't that be satisfying: Republicans have tried so hard to smear the Clintons for years, and in the end it worked for them. And President Bernie Sanders gets elected as a result.... That'd be delicious.
I think you can get 50-1 on Sanders now to win the election. I think there is value at 50-1. If Hillary gets disqualified or otherwise doesn't run, it would be hard for the dems to select a non Sanders guy. Out of the mess of candidates, I'd say Sanders would be by far the worst for the country. So as much as I detest the Clinton royalty, and their utter disdain for following the rules..... I am hoping she is the Democratic nominee. It is too bad we don't have a Rubio/Kasich/Bush running to see what a 'mainstream' Republican could do against such a flawed Democrat nominee.....
Quote: realDonaldTrumpIt was just announced-by sources-that no charges will be brought against Crooked Hillary Clinton. Like I said, the system is totally rigged!
I'm not around a tv at the moment so I'm not sure if this is just nonsense he's making up or if they are talking about it on the cable channels and he's regurgitating from there... but sounds good for Hillary.
