Play
Multi-Player
Coins
Community
Settings
Help
Community   Maps   Forum   Mail   Ladders   Clans   Recent Games
Sign In | Sign Up
<< Back to Off-topic Forum   

Posts 1 - 30 of 78   1  2  3  Next >>   
Are you on the #CLINTONTRAIN?: 6/13/2016 02:37:21


Wally Balls 
Level 58
Report
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pXOp5Je66Xo

Watch it. Love Clinton. Hillary R Clinton is going to be the next president of the US of A.
Are you on the #CLINTONTRAIN?: 6/13/2016 02:38:38


GeneralPE
Level 56
Report
*Clicks link* *sees her face* *shudders*

Also, http://www.arkancide.com/
Are you on the #CLINTONTRAIN?: 6/13/2016 02:48:53


knyte 
Level 58
Report
... Did you just revive a 20 year old conspiracy theory with nothing to back it up?

I'm rooting for her too, and looking forward to her presidency. :)

Her reputation's been under a lot of groundless attacks- including the "Hillary is a liar" meme. Since most of us probably weren't around when these shenanigans started, here's a bit of context: www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/6/11/1537582/-The-most-thorough-profound-and-moving-defense-of-Hillary-Clinton-I-have-ever-seen

Clinton's very interestingly had incredible approval ratings (including the third-highest Secretary of State approval rating ever) whenever she's in office but they plummet hard whenever she's seeking office. And there's a lot of weird stuff thrown at her- "rigging elections" (from Bernie), being a conservative, etc.- that meshes with the inaccurate Clinton persona that's flooded the public but doesn't have anything credible to back it up. :/

Edited 6/13/2016 02:51:31
Are you on the #CLINTONTRAIN?: 6/13/2016 02:49:28


GeneralPE
Level 56
Report
Here's what to do if you disagree:
Make a list of all the deceased.
Google them.
Verify that they were real people with real connections to the Clintons and who really died violently - and were not just imaginary people invented by anti-Clinton propagandists.
Find out how they were connected to the Clintons and what information they were going to divulge.
Find out when the Clintons became aware of this.
Find out how soon afterwards each potential witness was bumped off.
Explain why so many of these murders had similar MO's (bullets fired into the back of the head, exploding planes etc.).
Explain why so many of these murders were described as suicides by the coroner.
Find out who appointed the coroner.
Here's what to do if you still disagree:
Have a brain transplant or start eating more fish.
Then the only remaining question will be: "was it Bill or Hillary?"
Are you on the #CLINTONTRAIN?: 6/13/2016 02:55:15


knyte 
Level 58
Report
Too bad there's no good resources out there for quick fact-checking.

Oh wait: http://www.snopes.com/politics/clintons/bodycount.asp

What's more likely- that the Clintons are criminal masterminds killing people for the most trivial of reasons (but still somehow managing to get investigated for things like Benghazi and an e-mail server that they surely had the skill to cover up)... or that, after Bill Clinton broke the Democrats' three decades of near-drought in controlling the presidency, conspiracy theory after conspiracy theory was launched by their opposition to drag their political careers through the mud?

We've seen the same pattern with Obama- "he's a Muslim," "he's a communist atheist Kenyan," "he wants to take away your guns," "Sandy Hook was a false flag," etc.- crazy stories that make absolutely no sense, but people keep throwing shit against the wall because some of it sticks. And that's how you end up with someone like Trump in the running to inherit the legacy of people like Washington and Lincoln.
Are you on the #CLINTONTRAIN?: 6/13/2016 02:55:57


GeneralPE
Level 56
Report
Honesty isn't about making true statements in teleprompted speeches, it's about not skimming funds from a "charity", selling uranium, hiding servers, smearing women, etc. People that know her hate her. Stop defending her, you shrill.
Are you on the #CLINTONTRAIN?: 6/13/2016 03:04:30


knyte 
Level 58
Report
See- that's why people love slinging conspiracy theories.

You threw a conspiracy theory, I showed you some pretty solid refutations- and then you come back and sling more vague accusations, mixed in with minor things like using a teleprompter to make the list look more impressive.

That's just how the Clintons' political life has been for the last three decades- mostly progressive votes, then Sanders calls her a conservative over things like voting for the Iraq War while being a senator for the state affected the most by 9/11; incredibly high approval ratings, Republican congressmen accuse her of bribery, lies, and even murder (and then- in the words of the man who accused her of these things- end up having to "eat crow").

Even when thoroughly disproven, these accusations live on and generate a Clinton persona that just builds up- you then get to the point where people accuse her of "smearing women" because it's gotten to the point where anything negative about her just matches the stream of lies and fits the trend.

I think that, if you do even just a little bit of research, you'll find a candidate that's got a very strong track record for honesty and standing up for both progressive issues and America, someone who's got pretty damn clean hands, and a person who both sides of the aisle have worked with, appreciated (yep, contrary to your claim of "people that know her hate her," her colleagues in Congress, the State Department, etc., have made some pretty damn approving reviews), and supported as the most qualified candidate in the race by a wide margin.

I mean, you're at the point where you're accusing me- someone with a long history of this site and literally no behavior that would remotely imply being paid off- of being a "shill." You're really just at the point where you're throwing conspiracy theory after conspiracy theory and accusation after accusation.

You might not end up liking her- as a candidate, maybe as a person too, after all people have different preferences- but, given that you've probably not even been alive long enough to experience her political career, I'd really recommend you invest just a little bit of time to learn about her and actually try to understand Clinton as a person and as a candidate, not just the Machiavellian Disney character collectively constructed by her political opponents and members of the public who unquestioningly believed them.

I personally mainly like Clinton for that reason- she's gone through a lot of unwarranted shit (being accused of every crime in the book without evidence, getting attacked for things like her face, her voice, and her breasts from conservatives, etc.) and still stuck around and kept fighting for what she believes to be in the best interests of America. She's strong, and by staying in when most people would've quit, she's become an inspiration. Even Bernie's "progressives" (i.e., the college students who think the best way to respond to their candidate losing a primary in a landslide is voting for Donald J. Trump) have kept stabbing her pretty hard with baseless accusations of election fraud (literally based on online exit polls and sketchy YouTube videos) and called on her to be imprisoned for life due to an investigation that the vast majority of legal analysts agree will probably not result in any charges- an investigation that the FBI's recently revealed doesn't even focus on her e-mail server. It's pathetic how much hate she's gotten, and I'm glad she's kept fighting despite it.

Edited 6/13/2016 03:07:59
Are you on the #CLINTONTRAIN?: 6/13/2016 03:30:11


Major General Smedley Butler
Level 49
Report
Clinton is the main reason that the US supported Libyan rebels and bombed Libya. Over ten thousand deaths have occurred, and ironically, she's responsible for the Benghazi attacks regardless of the emails and request for extra security because she supported the destabilization of Libya that made it possible for those attacks to occur. And voting for the invasion of Iraq, which led to a million Iraqis dead, is a insanely immoral thing. Iraq had not attacked the US, it had not supported Al-Qaeda, and it had not planned on doing either of those things. She also supported her husband in the bombing of Yugoslavia, when there was evidence that the Serbian government under Milosevic had not committed ethnic cleansing in Kosova at all, and was only fighting the KLA (who with US support eventually ethnically cleansed Serbia of Roma and Serb Kosovars). She supported her husband's sanctions on Iraq that ended up killing thousands of folk.

At this point, I don't care if she killed a few dozen folk in assassinations. She's already responsible for tens of thousands of deaths.
Are you on the #CLINTONTRAIN?: 6/13/2016 03:34:24


Empire of Kilos
Level 31
Report
I got to be the 4000'th Dislike on that video, felt amazing.
Are you on the #CLINTONTRAIN?: 6/13/2016 03:41:56


[WOLF] The Conservative
Level 56
Report
"
Her reputation's been under a lot of groundless attacks- including the "Hillary is a liar" meme. "



^ Ok, who's the bastard who got our kynte high?. Seriously, I will fuck shit up
Are you on the #CLINTONTRAIN?: 6/13/2016 03:54:16


kynte
Level 51
Report
@Smedley: Thanks for criticizing her for her political choices instead of slinging vague conspiracy accusations. In an era of unprecedented polarization, that's the kind of conversation we need to actually have while making sure we avoid falling for Disney villain caricatures about the other side and giving them an honest look (I mean, this is a site where a disproportionate number of people say we should give even Hitler a second chance- it can't be that hard).

I think her only bad choice there was Iraq, and that's understandable for a senator from New York. As long as she admits it was a bad decision and has learned from it. As far as Libya goes, yeah the current status ain't pretty but staying quiet while Gaddafi attacked his own people and guaranteeing destabilization is much worse than trying to act and just risking destabilization. Same for Serbia (where there is ample evidence of ethnic cleansing and other problems, just contested by Serbia the same way Turkey contests the Armenian genocide). I think her decisions on military actions- while probably too globalist and interventionist for you- were good decisions to protect and pursue American interests. I certainly don't think we should shrink back to our borders and essentially give up superpower status. Both Hillary's foreign policy speech and multiple think tanks' arguments that a globally involved, strong America is critical to our economic welfare (after all, I don't trust China, Russia, India, or even the EU to pursue our economic interests) help make that point.

However, given that the only other candidate with a chance of getting the presidency is Trump and that our voting system is screwy and penalizes you for voting for your top choice candidate by making your less preferred major candidate likely to win, Hillary is still preferable to a candidate who's proposed significant deviations from our nuclear policy (that would result in more deaths) and war crimes like killing families of accused terrorists- as well as restrictions on the global free market (for a businessman, Trump's suspiciously willing to buy into the failed ideology of protectionism, although then again it might be out of self-interest to protect his inferior domestic business against superior foreign competitors)- from a libertarian perspective. Again, the choice is between a hundred thousand deaths and a million (from a libertarian standpoint; I'm not voting for someone I think of as a mass murderer), at which point it's probably hella tempting to vote for Gary Johnson. But out voting system is terrible and often requires you to vote against your top choice just to avoid the absolute worst scenario.

It would really make sense to campaign for preferential voting at this point; libertarians and other political groups are getting especially shafted.
Are you on the #CLINTONTRAIN?: 6/13/2016 03:54:28


Жұқтыру
Level 55
Report
I think Hilary Clinton gets loads of unearned attacks thrown at her. She does lie, and she did some bad things, but unless you're supporting Sanders (or Johnson), you're quite fully not one to talk. Trump lies far more and has no politic bumping at all.

Edited 6/13/2016 03:55:59
Are you on the #CLINTONTRAIN?: 6/13/2016 03:55:55


kynte
Level 51
Report
@the conservative: Before "fuck[ing] shit up," I'd appreciate it if you at least read the linked article from my first comment. I know it's long, but hey democracy ain't easy.
Are you on the #CLINTONTRAIN?: 6/13/2016 04:00:32


Жұқтыру
Level 55
Report
Also, I said this before, but Americans, you are in duty to vote for the other 7k million folk on the Earth, most especially to Syrians, Iraqis, Afghans, Yemeni, Pakistani, and whoever will come next - to those tortured and killed for small crimes in Middle America, and for those in the CIA's "black sites" in a huge direct contradiction to the European Court of Human Rights. And ultimately, responsible for innocent Americans imprisoned, for in most states, the gaoled can not vote.
Are you on the #CLINTONTRAIN?: 6/13/2016 04:03:00


[WOLF] The Conservative
Level 56
Report
Of course kynte lol you know I did. I just don't wanna another fight. Either way, between her and Trump I will be voting Gary Johnson XD
Are you on the #CLINTONTRAIN?: 6/13/2016 04:57:31


Major General Smedley Butler
Level 49
Report
As far as Libya goes, yeah the current status ain't pretty but staying quiet while Gaddafi attacked his own people and guaranteeing destabilization is much worse than trying to act and just risking destabilization.

His folk revolted. Now, Gadaffi's government wasn't the most pretty by far, and it was pretty anti-freedom, but the US government has no grounds to criticize it there. And of course he was attacking his own folk, when your folk rise up and start attacking your government, many say that the government has the choice to fight the rebels, and is moral in doing so. Considering the US would have no qualms doing so, it's not a strong case when you would do the same.

Same for Serbia (where there is ample evidence of ethnic cleansing and other problems, just contested by Serbia the same way Turkey contests the Armenian genocide)

There is a German intelligence report that says there was not enough evidence for the Serbian effort to be considered ethnic cleansing.

http://www.iraqwar.org/germanreport.htm

I think her decisions on military actions- while probably too globalist and interventionist for you- were good decisions to protect and pursue American interests

No amount of money is worth thousands of dead folk. I can go, kill a bunch of folk in a bank and take all the money, and that is me pursuing Butlertarian interests, but it's still immoral.

On Trump vs Clinton, they're both mixed bags. Trump wanting to get rid of NATO is a good thing, and they both are likely to increase the number of troops in Syria, Iraq and Yemen anyway. But the point is, when it's a mixed bag on both ends that would both result in thousands to tens of thousands of deaths, its immoral to choose either. This is also the best chance libertarians will likely get, with two hated candidates being the main contenders, and mass defections from the GOP.
Are you on the #CLINTONTRAIN?: 6/13/2016 05:03:51

[wolf]japan77
Level 57
Report
he's a communist atheist Kenyan
Lol'd at this. It's literally impossible to be a communist and a Keynesian. Keynes is a capitalist, and if you accused him of being a communist, he would probably be willing to put a bullet in you.

It would really make sense to campaign for preferential voting at this point; libertarians and other political groups are getting especially shafted.
Something that should be heavily pursued, we also wouldn't have gotten bush 43, Gore would've won without a doubt, as the Ralph Nader votes most likely shift to Gore. Gore technically won anyway with full recount of all votes in florida(http://www.factcheck.org/2008/01/the-florida-recount-of-2000/) We should get rid of the electoral college.
Are you on the #CLINTONTRAIN?: 6/13/2016 05:30:58


Wally Balls 
Level 58
Report
Are you on the #CLINTONTRAIN?: 6/13/2016 05:35:01


The Lord
Level 52
Report
Is #ClintonTrain even a thing? No, I'm not on the #ClintonTrain, I'm on the #TrumpTrain. Trump actually inspires enthusiasm in a lot of people, where those voting Clinton do it because they have always voted Democrat, or because they've been lied to by the media that Trump is a racist misogynist homophobe shitlord.

The Clinton presidency was one of the dirtiest in history. Bill raped lots of women, Hillary silenced them when she was not busy grandstanding as a women's rights advocate. Bill was impeached, he lost his law license. The Clintons should be in the Guinness book of world records for being the most crooked presidential couple. Yet, here we go again?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eyI2okq4h1U
Are you on the #CLINTONTRAIN?: 6/13/2016 05:37:57


Major General Smedley Butler
Level 49
Report
Lol'd at this. It's literally impossible to be a communist and a Keynesian. Keynes is a capitalist, and if you accused him of being a communist, he would probably be willing to put a bullet in you.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenya

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/kenyan
Are you on the #CLINTONTRAIN?: 6/13/2016 05:49:34


Wally Balls 
Level 58
Report
Is #ClintonTrain even a thing?


It is now :)

But no, in general Clinton supporters keep a lower profile than Bern victims and Trumptards, especially online. For one, we know our candidate is going to be the next President, so there is on reason to make a huge display of it. We're just enjoying the theatrics until November. And second, most vocal supporters of other candidates hate Clinton so even revealing that we support her opens us up to all manner of trolls attacking her about emails and speeches and shit. Once again, better to just lay low and enjoy the show, knowing she's going to be the next President. Let me say that one more time, the next President of the United States will be Hillary Clinton. Doesn't matter how much you don't like her.
Are you on the #CLINTONTRAIN?: 6/13/2016 05:59:47


The Lord
Level 52
Report
Hillary tries to keep it quiet because her history offer so many legitimate reasons to attack her. Case in point, she attacked Trump, calling him a sexist. Trump said she was an enabler. She shut up about the whole thing after that because continuing to talk about that would only emphasize her weak track record when it comes to women's rights. At the same time, the worst thing they can truthfully say about Trump and sexism is that he once told a woman she shouldn't eat too much cake to not get fat.

Edited 6/13/2016 06:00:35
Are you on the #CLINTONTRAIN?: 6/13/2016 06:04:10


Жұқтыру
Level 55
Report
It would really make sense to campaign for preferential voting at this point; libertarians and other political groups are getting especially shafted.
Something that should be heavily pursued, we also wouldn't have gotten bush 43, Gore would've won without a doubt, as the Ralph Nader votes most likely shift to Gore. Gore technically won anyway with full recount of all votes in florida(http://www.factcheck.org/2008/01/the-florida-recount-of-2000/) We should get rid of the electoral college.


I agree with what you both say, the system is bad, but this is the least of the problems. Voters aren't informed, and an easy way to fix this would be like so: have the candidates all put frains that they make, which can highlight what they support, and redflag what the other candidates support, and it wouldn't be biased since all candidates would be making it. This kind of thing would discourage casual voting, or voting on charisma (something that drives many Trump supporters, and I can see why, I agree that Trump has the most likeable attitude of them all. But what he says, and more weightily, what he plans to do, are full crap. And you'd assign weight to each frain, and then your 1 vote would be split into decims amongst each candidate by how much you agree with their policies.

I did a small analysis on Warlight, after several folk took an American presidential candidate quiz and posted what % matches they got. Results: (http://imgh.us/politchart_3.png). Though it's evidently a pretty small and biased sample size, Gary Johnson was on average most liked based on data of who posted their match. But if everyone voted the one they liked the most, Sanders would get the most votes, winning even though he has less of an average match than Johnson.

Trump actually inspires enthusiasm in a lot of people, where those voting Clinton do it because they have always voted Democrat, or because they've been lied to by the media that Trump is a racist misogynist homophobe shitlord.


This is irrevelant. His charisma is irrelevant (and he is against gay marriage, so I guess homophobic is a right word to say - and he is a shitlord, you'd be daft if you didn't think all the mainstream candidates were).
Are you on the #CLINTONTRAIN?: 6/13/2016 06:20:23


kynte
Level 51
Report
You do realize that candidates actually do that, right? You can literally go to any one of their websites and they all have an Issues section. If they've served in public office, you can also easily find their voting records- and they bring them up regularly in debates.
Are you on the #CLINTONTRAIN?: 6/13/2016 06:22:36


The Lord
Level 52
Report
This is irrevelant. His charisma is irrelevant (and he is against gay marriage, so I guess homophobic is a right word to say - and he is a shitlord, you'd be daft if you didn't think all the mainstream candidates were).

He doesn't inspire enthusiasm because of his charisma but because he brings political stances on the table that were deliberately ignored by the establishment, like ending political correctness and stopping radical islamic terrorism.

Even Sanders inspires a lot more enthusiasm than Crooked Hillary, and he's a bore.

Trump isn't against gay marriage, he's for states deciding it for themselves.

Edited 6/13/2016 06:23:16
Are you on the #CLINTONTRAIN?: 6/13/2016 06:35:43


Major General Smedley Butler
Level 49
Report
stopping radical islamic terrorism.

The entire war on terror was trying to do that, and nothing Trump proposes would actually stop a terrorist from going to Mexico, and going to the US that way.
Are you on the #CLINTONTRAIN?: 6/13/2016 07:02:21


The Lord
Level 52
Report
You don't think reducing illegal immigration helps?
Are you on the #CLINTONTRAIN?: 6/13/2016 07:07:22


kynte
Level 51
Report
Given that second-generation immigrants are significantly more likely to commit terrorist acts than first-generation immigrants? Trump's Muslim ban + wall proposals won't have a big enough effect to justify their negatives.
Are you on the #CLINTONTRAIN?: 6/13/2016 07:16:31


Жұқтыру
Level 55
Report
You do realize that candidates actually do that, right? You can literally go to any one of their websites and they all have an Issues section. If they've served in public office, you can also easily find their voting records- and they bring them up regularly in debates.


I'm saying for them to make a quiz instead of a ballot, and this quiz would pick the candidate you really wanted, not the one you just liked the most.

He doesn't inspire enthusiasm because of his charisma but because he brings political stances on the table that were deliberately ignored by the establishment, like ending political correctness and stopping radical islamic terrorism.


My points still stands: don't vote any politician in just since they're charismatic and have an enthousiastic supportbase.

Also, really? Something that's not really weighty (and the way he plans to solve it is slashing speech freedom), and something that he didn't at at all bring up...you really think that Obama and the mythic conspiracy of "establishment" didn't talk about Islamic violent extremism? I wish this was the case, since all that's happening is fearmongering and ignoring of more pressing issues like environment, but no, I highly highly doubt that Trump brought up the talk of radic Islamic dreadknighthood in American policy. That crown more likely goes to the lovable wonderful fellow, George Bush.
Are you on the #CLINTONTRAIN?: 6/13/2016 07:35:16


Wally Balls 
Level 58
Report
You know how you can tell Clinton is the best candidate? The best thing anybody else can say about their candidate is an attack on Clinton. They have nothing good to say about their own guy other than 'but her emails'
Posts 1 - 30 of 78   1  2  3  Next >>   

Contact | About WarLight | Play Risk Online | Multiplayer Strategy Game | Challenge Friends, Win Money | Skill Game | Terms of Service