No he didn't. He just doesn't want a neo-fascist to be president. What would you want him to do, endorse Trump, endorse Jill Stein of the Greens who has no chance at all and will only help Trump, keep criticizing Hillary which would only help Trump? He did exactly the right thing.
No. But you started it and made a false statement. I corrected you.
I find it absolutely bizarre the hate Hillary/Love Trump attitude around here.
And please spare us the self righteous indignation about America "callously inflicting mayhem across the globe." That aggression is certainly deplorable but it was aided and abetted by Britain in many cases (50s Iran, 2003 Iraq) and just look at the history of the British empire that gave birth to America.
1. Again I ask.....What would you want him to do? Please answer that simple question.He's said Killary is the one percent, the wall street candidate, the Goldman Sachs candidate . The type of thing he was starting a revolution against. And now he's turned round and endorsed the monster. He's a fucking sell out and a joke . A waste of everybody's time.
A sell out .
1. Again I ask.....What would you want him to do? Please answer that simple question.
2. As far as me being "in awe of this monster".....No I'm terrified of Herr Trump and his brown-shirt type followers. And do you not get that were you in the US, you'd be seen as one of Trump's rabid nationalistic and racist mob chanting USA! and Build that wall!....and cheering as he proclaims “The police are not just part of our society. The police are the best of our society. We have to remember that. They represent our highest ideals, our greatest values and our most noble characteristics. When our police are attacked, our entire nation is attacked. Renumber that. So the message must be delivered clearly for all to hear. The hostility against our police has to end and has to end right now." That kind of talk frightens me and any politician in Britain speaking like that would frighten you I think.
Ok. That's what you think he should not do. And I agree Hillary is corrupt. She swims in the corrupt American political sea. But what should he do. Nothing? He's against Trump and promised to endorse the Democratic nominee and he did so.NOT ENDORSE THE CORRUPT , BOUGHT AND PAID FOR WALL STREET CANDIDATE HE'S BEEN PROCLAIMING A REVOLUTION AGAINST THIS PAST YEAR
Bill Clinton received over 80% of the black vote both times he ran for pres. I don't think all those black people were stupid or misled. And though it's not relevant to this election, Bill Clinton was never convicted of rape.And Killary Clinton is without a doubt one of the people primarily responsible for that culture of hate against Black Americans from her previous role in the white house, at her rapey husbands side .
Ok. That's what you think he should not do. And I agree Hillary is corrupt. She swims in the corrupt American political sea. But what should he do. Nothing? He's against Trump and promised to endorse the Democratic nominee and he did so.
Bill Clinton received over 80% of the black vote both times he ran for pres. I don't think all those black people were stupid or misled. And though it's not relevant to this election, Bill Clinton was never convicted of rape.
e
" Super Predators...bring them to heel " 3 strikes and it's a life sentence. Black Gulags today thanks to her .
Does that not frighten you Tom ? It'd sure as hell frighten me if I was a black American .
Why does it not frighten you when it's Killary ? I'd really like to know .
http://www.theroot.com/blog/journal-isms/poll-just-1-of-blacks-back-trump/“According to the Quinnipiac University poll, just 1 percent of African-American voters supported Trump. That was well behind the 6 percent of the black vote that went to Mitt Romney in 2012, and the 4 percent that supported John McCain in 2008, the newspaper reported.
“In contrast, his Democratic rival, Hillary Clinton, received 91 percent support from African-American voters, the poll found.
Oh behave Yuwipi - these are not concessions - they are just puff and flummery which Clinton will almost certainly walk right back. With no way of enforcing these demands (and especially with the veiled layers of (ahem) democracy in the US, this is just meaningless. You may not quite see it like the rest of the world but the US interference, meddling and absolute disdain for supranational bodies such as the UN, we tend to be extremely lukewarm when anyone with the hawkish (and corrupt) attitudes displayed by Clinton has the mandate of power...and Hilary is a particularly egregious example of right wing establishment Democrat.Of course, the US has never even felt a suspicion of invasion and bombing on their own soil...despite callously inflicting mayhem across the globe...well yeah, many of us preferred Trump's isolationist insanity...I can see why it would be shit for the US but the rest of us...it just didn't seem such a great bargain to have a Clinton.
Just as you've ignored Trump and Gingrichs response to police killings and black harassment . Like it never happened .
The party platform isn't meaningless. Go research how it has changed over time and you'll see a history how the political climate changed. For that matter, go check out how the Republican platform has changed over time. When the political climate moved right, so did the platform. To the point that it's become the corporatist rag its is. Our job is to move it back where it belongs and translate it into policy.
Oh Yuwipi, I apologise for my bad-tempered post - I know how hard and conscientiously you have worked on behalf of Sanders. I do think the status quo is likely to remain much the same in the US...which is demoralising...and yep, Trump is truly a delusional crazoid...just get the jitters because, well. Clinton.
Because she was talking about violent black criminal gangs that killed other blacks in the midst of a crack epidemic in black neighborhoods. And as I have repeatedly said, 90% of the blacks in those gulags were arrested, tried, convicted & imprisoned by state, county, & city authorities, not by the federal gov.
I'll trust blacks to decide which candidate is better for them, not white pundits.
http://www.theroot.com/blog/journal-isms/poll-just-1-of-blacks-back-trump/
Because she was talking about violent black criminal gangs that killed other blacks in the midst of a crack epidemic in black neighborhoods. And as I have repeatedly said, 90% of the blacks in those gulags were arrested, tried, convicted & imprisoned by state, county, & city authorities, not by the federal gov.
I'll trust blacks to decide which candidate is better for them, not white pundits.
Poll: Just 1 Percent of Blacks Back Donald Trump
Plainly you don't trust these black people to know what's best for them either
Or this guy who states Killarys blitz on the blacks back in the 90s is why BLM exists today
At this point I think the best case scenario is for Clinton to be elected, appoint two SCOTUS judges, and then get impeached. The republicans are in on this, for their part, they've already made overtures suggesting they believe she can be impeached for things she's already done.
The hope would then be that the VP would be someone strong enough to cast off the worst parts of her agenda.
ETA: if this were to happen after the halfway point of her first term, the VP could still stand for president in 2020 and 2024.
Oh Yuwipi, I apologise for my bad-tempered post - I know how hard and conscientiously you have worked on behalf of Sanders. I do think the status quo is likely to remain much the same in the US...which is demoralising...and yep, Trump is truly a delusional crazoid...just get the jitters because, well. Clinton.
I don't think its fair to say bernie sold out. He's a Democrat. If you lost you face front and shake hands with the winner. What else will you do, hive off into some irrelevant gropsucle? I do like the idea of the sandernistas beginning the long march through state politics though
Because she was talking about violent black criminal gangs that killed other blacks in the midst of a crack epidemic in black neighborhoods.
I must correct you again as I did on another thread. Bill didn't end welfare. The Clintons are not responsible for the mass incarceration of blacks. Only 10% of those incarcerated are in federal prison. 90% are arrested, tried, convicted & sentenced by state, county & city governments.Bollocks. She was spouting racist cliches in a wretched amoral scramble for votes. Meanwhile, her husband was busy ending welfare. The Clintons are responsible for mass incarceration, which is one of the greatest crimes of the twentieth century.
That's before we even get to "we came, we saw, he died" and the rest of her disgusting foreign policy.
I see no substantive difference between her and Trump.
The Clintons are not responsible for the mass incarceration of blacks. Only 10% of those incarcerated are in federal prison. 90% are arrested, tried, convicted & sentenced by state, county & city governments.
you seem to be saying, do you want someone who knows about repression or someone who will be a keen pupil?No you are wrong. Bill Clinton is indeed responsible for mass incarceration, as he himself readily admits.
More to the current point, Hillary supported and endorsed his policy at every stage. Thus she is complicit in what by any measure must be regarded as a heinous crime against humanity. She should be locked up, not running for President.
Give me Trump any day. He's a wanker of the first water, but he hasn't actually participated in this kind of repression.
"President Bill Clinton on Wednesday conceded that over-incarceration in the United States stems in part from policies passed under his administration.
Clinton signed into law an omnibus crime bill in 1994 that included the federal "three strikes" provision, mandating life sentences for criminals convicted of a violent felony after two or more prior convictions, including drug crimes. On Wednesday, Clinton acknowledged that policy's role in over-incarceration in an interview with CNN's Christiane Amanpour."
Bill Clinton concedes role in mass incarceration - CNNPolitics.com
Bill didn't end welfare.
you seem to be saying, do you want someone who knows about repression or someone who will be a keen pupil?
ok then, i'll bite: what has clinton been convicted of?I don't want either of them.
But Clinton is a proven criminal. Trump is only a potential one. Any sensible person would prefer the latter to the former.