Nonprofit Linked to Trump Sons Offers Donors Access to President

Diamond Jim said:
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2016/...-access-to-president-on-inauguration-weekend/

Click to expand...

So now these types of fundraisers, which both parties have been doing forever, are a problem? These same WSJ/MSM cocksuckers never complained once about Clinton and her $300,000/plate $5,000/photo fundraisers with Clooney and all those Silicon Valley :eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:s.

I'm all for calling these assholes out but they need to call out every single one of these assholes from both parties hosting their pay for play rackets.
 
Cubo de Sangre said:
It's obvious.

There needs to be a middle party that doesn't rail on their competition for things they defend themselves over. Someplace people can go who aren't hypocrites. Like maybe a party dedicated to upholding the Constitution rather than dishonestly attempting to circumvent the parts they don't like. One that would work for change in the legally mandated way and be willing to respect the law when they can't swing enough votes for their position. One that doesn't resort to deception for support. Blah, blah, blah.
Click to expand...

The issue is that the system itself creates a two party system because of how elections are carried out.

The presidential elections of 1912 made that quite clear.
 
Holy shit, this would be unprecedented if it weren't for the Clintons! Are they the gift that doesn't stop giving, or what?
 
Rod1 said:
The issue is that the system itself creates a two party system because of how elections are carried out.

The presidential elections of 1912 made that quite clear.
Click to expand...

Less and less I see that as a problem. As someone who has long supported 3rd parties, there's plenty of opportunity to elevate new ideas through voting in the primaries. I have a hard time believing that in places where multiple parties win seats that there isn't still hypocrisy.
 
Cubo de Sangre said:
Less and less I see that as a problem. As someone who has long supported 3rd parties, there's plenty of opportunity to elevate new ideas through voting in the primaries. I have a hard time believing that in places where multiple parties win seats that there isn't still hypocrisy.
Click to expand...

A succesful third party would eliminate the weaker of the 2 and take its spot.

As i said, just look at the 1912 election.
 
Rod1 said:
People collectively dont give a shit isnt that quite obvious? 320 million people and only 2 parties for over 150 years.

America is in a bad spot because as a nation you have missed on a lot of strife that has affected more conflictive nations, the last major strife was the civil war and it seems that the aftermath was nor properly handled.
Click to expand...
Woahhhh Teddy Roosevelt led the Progressive Party in 1912, only to be sold out by that fake progressive Hoover. There was even a Socialist Party candidate about 100 years ago that garnered 5-10% of the popular vote.

However, we're definitely due for another competing party.
 
Rod1 said:
A succesful third party would eliminate the weaker of the 2 and take its spot.

As i said, just look at the 1912 election.
Click to expand...
Yeah, briefly looking back it seems the "Progressive Party" aka all former Republicans simply hoodwinked the nation. Although the fact that they not only got the entire nation to take notice, but to actually elect somebody from a new party is pretty significant. Whether the party representatives actually believed in the movement they were selling is another debate.
 
mr.bigglesworth said:
So now these types of fundraisers, which both parties have been doing forever, are a problem? These same WSJ/MSM cocksuckers never complained once about Clinton and her $300,000/plate $5,000/photo fundraisers with Clooney and all those Silicon Valley :eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:s.

I'm all for calling these assholes out but they need to call out every single one of these assholes from both parties hosting their pay for play rackets.
Click to expand...

We are only complaining because you guys complained about it, now you're doing it... so yeah. That's all.
 
mr.bigglesworth said:
Woahhhh Teddy Roosevelt led the Progressive Party in 1912, only to be sold out by that fake progressive Hoover. There was even a Socialist Party candidate about 100 years ago that garnered 5-10% of the popular vote.

However, we're definitely due for another competing party.
Click to expand...

And how many electoral college votes did Roosevelt got? how many did Taft?

Electoral college is one of the strongest tools of the two party system, it means that any form of dissent among a main party will be punished massively in general elections.
 
Rational Poster said:
We are only complaining because you guys complained about it, now you're doing it... so yeah. That's all.
Click to expand...
What? You really have zero idea about my political identity. Hint: it's about as transgendered as they come. I'm all over the place but three things in a candidate I refuse to support- those who don't uphold the constitution, liars, and the crooked thieves who use their positions of power to enrich themselves. Clinton was all of those. Trump is at the very least one, but most likely will join her company as well.
 
Happiness said:
It's so strange. Trump has no admirable qualities at all, he's repulsive.
Click to expand...
Bu bu but he's gonna drain the swamp and lock up Clinton! I think people have become so disillusioned by politicians they were willing to go full retard and pick someome like Trump.
 
mr.bigglesworth said:
What? You really have zero idea about my political identity. Hint: it's about as transgendered as they come. I'm all over the place but three things in a candidate I refuse to support- those who don't uphold the constitution, liars, and the crooked thieves who use their positions of power to enrich themselves. Clinton was all of those. Trump is at the very least one, but most likely will join her company as well.
Click to expand...

I'm not referring to you specifically, more Trump's entire campaign platform.
 
Rod1 said:
As i said, just look at the 1912 election.
Click to expand...

Two things I don't like. History and research.


Yuck.gif



:D
 
Rational Poster said:
I'm not referring to you specifically, more Trump's entire campaign platform.
Click to expand...
You said "now you're doing it" so I could only surmise that you meant me specifically. Like hell I'd support Trump. He talks a lot of shit and hijacked Sanders' platform with no intention to legitimately follow through with any of it. Still better than Clinton, though.
 
The only thing i respect about trump is his ability to pimp emotional rednecks like cheap hoes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,982
Messages
55,459,265
Members
174,787
Latest member
Freddie556

Share this page

Back
Top