What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

POTUS 45.08: Suckers

Status
Not open for further replies.
Brenthoven said:
I never have said Hill would be worse than Trump. Ever. Trump is horrible. So please, stop putting words in my mouth. I think she would have been bad. Period. That's it. That is where it ends.
Click to expand...

Please elaborate on why HRC would have been bad as president. Use specific past events, decisions, and statements to support your hypothesis. Wild speculation is insufficient to prove your thesis.
 
Re: POTUS 45.08: Suckers

dxmnkd316 said:
So I read the AP transcript. It's just gibberish. And anyone who votrd for this man should be ashamed of themselves. Its just gibberish.
Click to expand...

I know drunks at bars that are more coherent...the interviewer must have been in awe of the ramblings!
 
Re: POTUS 45.08: Suckers

Almington said:
Please elaborate on why HRC would have been bad as president. Use specific past events, decisions, and statements to support your hypothesis. Wild speculation is insufficient to prove your thesis.
Click to expand...

Kowtowing to big business, yes some of the email stuff (although it is NOT as bad as the GOP says it is), the fact that she's part of a legacy to keep the "machine" going (part of my criticism of W, also, btw), the Clinton Foundation shadow shenanigans.

I have always said her qualifications are quite impressive at best, legit at worst. She just didn't fit my idea as a president.
 
Re: POTUS 45.08: Suckers

You forgot the pizza joint with the underage sex slaves.

Seriously, when you find yourself hand waving with terms like "the machine" and "shadow shenanigans", doesn't it cross your mind for even a second that maybe you're talking out of your arse?
 
Last edited:
Brenthoven said:
Kowtowing to big business, yes some of the email stuff (although it is NOT as bad as the GOP says it is), the fact that she's part of a legacy to keep the "machine" going (part of my criticism of W, also, btw), the Clinton Foundation shadow shenanigans.

I have always said her qualifications are quite impressive at best, legit at worst. She just didn't fit my idea as a president.
Click to expand...

Yeah having her family members get clearance, and get patents...it's awful.
 
Re: POTUS 45.08: Suckers

GrinCDXX said:
You forgot the pizza joint with the underage sex slaves.

Seriously, when you find yourself hand waving with terms like "the machine" and "shadow shenanigans", doesn't it cross your mind for even a second that maybe you're talking out of your arse?
Click to expand...

Step in line with my views, or be burned at the stake. That's the translation I see.

And the pizza joint was BS, we all know it. Don't lump me in with those folks.
 
GrinCDXX said:
You forgot the pizza joint with the underage sex slaves.

Seriously, when you find yourself hand waving with terms like "the machine" and "shadow shenanigans", doesn't it cross your mind for even a second that maybe you're talking out of your arse?
Click to expand...

If malia obama gets an internship you better Believe Brent will be here to object
 
Re: POTUS 45.08: Suckers

Deutsche Gopher Fan said:
Really? You're ok with all the nepotism here?
Click to expand...

Key word: earned.

Chelsea Clinton did alright for herself, and I'm happy she did. We need more educated people in this world. Did her name help? Maybe. Maybe not. That isn't party-particular, though.

If one works and earns their path in life, more power to them.
 
Brenthoven said:
Key word: earned.

Chelsea Clinton did alright for herself, and I'm happy she did. We need more educated people in this world. Did her name help? Maybe. Maybe not. That isn't party-particular, though.

If one works and earns their path in life, more power to them.
Click to expand...
Ok I was joking. Ivanka has not earned her way here. This has nothing to do with Chelsea ...there's only one first daughter trying to influence with the president here
 
Re: POTUS 45.08: Suckers

Deutsche Gopher Fan said:
Ok I was joking. Ivanka has not earned her way here. This has nothing to do with Chelsea ...there's only one first daughter trying to influence with the president here
Click to expand...

I agree Ivanka has not earned her way there. I brought up Chelsea to show that I try and judge on the person, not the party nor affiliation.
 
Re: POTUS 45.08: Suckers

Our military is so proud.
They were not proud at all.
They had their heads down.
Now they have their heads up.

Trump quote or Drake lyrics? You decide.
 
Re: POTUS 45.08: Suckers

Deutsche Gopher Fan said:
Ok I was joking. Ivanka has not earned her way here. This has nothing to do with Chelsea ...there's only one first daughter trying to influence with the president here
Click to expand...

Ivanka's whatever, to be honest. Her husband is "in charge" of everything from Middle East peace to the VA to "revamping the federal government".

That sets new nepotism records.
 
Re: POTUS 45.08: Suckers

St. Clown said:
Yes, I'm a snowflake. :rolleyes:

I just don't think it's wise to mention underage children in anything happening in regards to what his/her parents do because the kid has no choice in how close it gets to the process. Maybe Baron did tell Daddy Dearest his speech was the greatest ever, but it's not like there's much else he could say on the matter. Lumping the kid in with the others you did in that short list, it's clearly not meant as a complement to the child.
Click to expand...

oh FFS, "clearly not meant as a complement to the child" ? It was a slam on the orange **** head saying only his family would have told him what a great speech it was, it was not an attack on his child. We aren't even allowed to mention his children's names now?
 
Re: POTUS 45.08: Suckers

ScoobyDoo said:
Ok, Switzerland.
Click to expand...

And people wonder why there's a divide in politics. Obviously there is no possible way to try and take the best from "both sides" of the spectrum and find a compromise. Just a bunch of name-calling and assumption of views.

Have fun, folks, I'm outta here.
 
Re: POTUS 45.08: Suckers

Brenthoven said:
And people wonder why there's a divide in politics. Obviously there is no possible way to try and take the best from "both sides" of the spectrum and find a compromise. Just a bunch of name-calling and assumption of views.

Have fun, folks, I'm outta here.
Click to expand...

You, like all of your ilk have failed to realize how far right we have drifted. The middle today is complete right wing pyschoville.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top