Originally Posted by HarryTheSpider (Post 11953118)

Where, and what, is this liberal press of which you speak? I've looked for evidence of it in the mainstream - couldn't find it....

Originally Posted by dakota44 (Post 11953119)

Remember to whom you are responding. He mostly makes up stuff or posts very conversative links.

Originally Posted by themadpooper (Post 11953631)

dakota44 doesn't like conservatives (god forbid we exist), doesn't like to be contradicted, and is generally a bit clueless as noted in other threads. Probably a lovely bloke, otherwise

Originally Posted by themadpooper (Post 11953627)

Originally Posted by Gordon Barlow (Post 11952281)

Speaking as an old codger, with my best days behind me, I have to say I'm extremely disappointed to read so much parroting of mainstream bullshit on this thread. Whatever happened to youthful questioning of authority and orthodoxy? Has BE's younger generation abandoned all willingness to doubt what they're told by their "betters"?

Trump's and Sanders's main attraction is not their respective policies but the bare fact that they offer themselves as alternatives to the mindless corruption espoused by all the other candidates. As the two major parties are learning, there is a rebellion "out there". It is being cleverly led by the two front-runners, whose supporters to a large degree don't care what their policies are. They are voting for their heroes out of rebellion; that's all.

If Trump is allowed to be the Republican nominee (meaning, if the powers that be don't assassinate him), he would beat Clinton very comfortably, because many Sanders supporters would switch to Trump. Yes, indeed: so-called socialists would prefer the rude capitalist than the corrupt establishment stooge. Make no mistake: this election is putting "the establishment" on notice that their days are numbered. Hence the very real fear of an assassination. Will that happen? It's better than even money, in my book.

Originally Posted by themadpooper (Post 11953642)

Agree with this

So many smug types on this thread, all desperately trying to convince themselves and each other Trump doesn't have a chance when the numbers contradict this on a daily basis. I was watching CNN earlier and the numbers they had showed a 1 point difference between Trump and Clinton in Pennsylvania, how is that even possible when according to liberals and the general anti Trump crowd, Trump had absolutely no hope of taking a place like this? Don't get me wrong, I don't want Trump but Clinton? God help us

Originally Posted by themadpooper (Post 11953642)

Agree with this

So many smug types on this thread, all desperately trying to convince themselves and each other Trump doesn't have a chance when the numbers contradict this on a daily basis. I was watching CNN earlier and the numbers they had showed a 1 point difference between Trump and Clinton in Pennsylvania, how is that even possible when according to liberals and the general anti Trump crowd, Trump had absolutely no hope of taking a place like this? Don't get me wrong, I don't want Trump but Clinton? God help us

Originally Posted by amideislas (Post 11953730)

You're sounding like a tried-true Brit, exercising your "moan entitlement".

Can't stand Corbyn, hates Cameron. Osborne has "ruined" the economy. Farage is a loudmouth nutter, Boris is Trump's brother. All the rest are wimps. Everything is shite.

Trump is bad. Clinton is bad. All of them are bad...

...but not one peep suggesting anything "good" as an alternative, nor any way forward. We're doomed...

Standard-issue British moan.

Originally Posted by robin1234 (Post 11953891)

You'd better watch it ami. We might start bitching & moaning about you :argue: :frown: :eek:

Originally Posted by Steerpike (Post 11953709)

I would take Clinton any time over Trump...

Originally Posted by Gordon Barlow (Post 11954010)

Clinton has been partly responsible for about a million civilian deaths, Trump for none. Why would you prefer an apparent psychopath over a mere loud-mouth? What if we all brought that reasoning to our everyday lives?

Originally Posted by Gordon Barlow (Post 11954010)

Clinton has been partly responsible for about a million civilian deaths, Trump for none. Why would you prefer an apparent psychopath over a mere loud-mouth? What if we all brought that reasoning to our everyday lives?

Originally Posted by robin1234 (Post 11954428)

Really, all you're saying here is that Clinton has held high office in the U.S. Government and Trump never has. And the idea of someone running for president who has never held senior military or civilian government offices (or been a legislator) is certainly novel. Not sure it's an experiment we should be embarking on...

Originally Posted by moneypenny20 (Post 11954437)

This million plus people she's murdered, did she do that alone or with help? :unsure:

Originally Posted by zargof (Post 11954447)

I think Bill buried the bodies.