caze Posted June 6, 2016 Share Posted June 6, 2016 http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/donald-trump-does-not-have-campaign Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caze Posted June 6, 2016 Share Posted June 6, 2016 (edited) https://twitter.com/kumailn/status/739818975585021952 Edited June 6, 2016 by caze Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chenGOD Posted June 6, 2016 Share Posted June 6, 2016 http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/donald-trump-does-not-have-campaign Trump probably figures it's worked out so far for him, why bother now. Lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cwmbrancity Posted June 6, 2016 Share Posted June 6, 2016 possible Brexit & Trump as prez whatever next, gods? cue Putin in the Baltic states, drinking their voddy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
may be rude Posted June 6, 2016 Share Posted June 6, 2016 i disagree that accepting donations equates to being corrupt. i could accept a donation and not be corrupt. i bet you could too. so if corporations, banks and other organizations gave you $30 million in 16 months for "speeches" you wouldn't consider doing them a solid the next time they're in trouble? because you and i both know, banks and corporations aren't in business to give out money. they're in business to make money also, let's say for example i came to your house and one evening and you invited a couple of friends over for a chat with one hitch: everyone gives me $353,000 that night. what do you suppose those friends would want for their money? those high price dinner invitations are a common way of getting donations. people get paid for speeches. i could do a dinner like that and speeches like that and then decline to do those people any favors. there would be nothing stopping me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nebraska Posted June 6, 2016 Author Share Posted June 6, 2016 ^^^ can you give an example of someone in politics who got those kind of donations from such institutions like banks or corporations then didn't them any favors in return? (apart from you of course) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caze Posted June 6, 2016 Share Posted June 6, 2016 (edited) yeah, even Sanders had to pay back the NRA after they backed him by voting against the Brady Bill (5 times). (I'm guessing Vermont is a big gun state?) Edited June 6, 2016 by caze Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goDel Posted June 6, 2016 Share Posted June 6, 2016 ^^^ can you give an example of someone in politics who got those kind of donations from such institutions like banks or corporations then didn't them any favors in return? (apart from you of course) How would you scale getting the Dodd-Frank bill through senate/congress? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nebraska Posted June 6, 2016 Author Share Posted June 6, 2016 goDel: i don't know enough of the details to have a proper opinion on how to scale it. i know it was done to help bail out banks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caze Posted June 6, 2016 Share Posted June 6, 2016 goDel: i don't know enough of the details to have a proper opinion on how to scale it. i know it was done to help bail out banks that was TARP. dodd-frank was the regulatory update. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goDel Posted June 6, 2016 Share Posted June 6, 2016 (edited) and regardless of the difference between tarp and dodd-frank, i hope people don't consider the bail-out as just doing the banks a huge favor. it was a necessary evil. no bail-out might would have caused the entire economy to crash. not just the financial system. Edited June 6, 2016 by goDel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nebraska Posted June 6, 2016 Author Share Posted June 6, 2016 and regardless of the difference between tarp and dodd-frank, i hope people don't consider the bail-out as just doing the banks a huge favor. it was a necessary evil. no bail-out might would have caused the entire economy to crash. not just the financial system. beyond that, it's amazing people wouldn't be outraged when such a bill doesn't benefit the common person in anyway shape or form. the only people who benefit from it are bank execs. it reminds me of the guy who made a video detailing why he wasn't going to watch the new ghostbusters movie and people got mad at him. none of those people will financially benefit from more people watching ghostbusters, neither are they executives at universal studios, so why is it a big deal to them? imo, wealth has become the new religion in western culture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chenGOD Posted June 7, 2016 Share Posted June 7, 2016 Wealth has been the new religion since the 80s. Remember Gordon "greed is good" Gekko? The 80s is when a whole bunch of bad juju started happening with regards to financial markets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azatoth Posted June 7, 2016 Share Posted June 7, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chenGOD Posted June 7, 2016 Share Posted June 7, 2016 Exactly. Replace with Thatcher for those "across the pond". And for anyone who cares: Republicans would gut Dodd-Frank and the Volcker rule http://www.wsj.com/articles/gops-jeb-hensarling-takes-aim-at-dodd-frank-volcker-rule-1464977161 (google the title and click through from there if the paywall blocks this link) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ambermonk Posted June 7, 2016 Share Posted June 7, 2016 That was a cute stunt last night that Clington and her buddies in AP pulled last night by declaring her victory in the primary before the remaining states vote today. And the superdelegates don't vote til July 25th. You're not fooling anybody, Shillary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caze Posted June 7, 2016 Share Posted June 7, 2016 lol, so paranoid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olo Posted June 7, 2016 Share Posted June 7, 2016 That was a cute stunt last night that Clington and her buddies in AP pulled last night by declaring her victory in the primary before the remaining states vote today. And the superdelegates don't vote til July 25th. You're not fooling anybody, Shillary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silent Member Posted June 7, 2016 Share Posted June 7, 2016 Please stop saying Clington it's not funny and it's not clever. Let me make up an example: Burnie Sanderps See? Lame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doublename Posted June 7, 2016 Share Posted June 7, 2016 Guys, never stop. Even after the election. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ambermonk Posted June 7, 2016 Share Posted June 7, 2016 Please stop saying Clington it's not funny and it's not clever. Let me make up an example: Burnie Sanderps See? Lame. Nobody complained when Eugene said it. Dunno why you're bitching about it now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweepstakes Posted June 7, 2016 Share Posted June 7, 2016 I like Sanderps tho Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
koolkeyZ865 Posted June 7, 2016 Share Posted June 7, 2016 My gut is telling me that Bernie is either going to drop out tonight or tomorrow. Hillary has stolen this thing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silent Member Posted June 7, 2016 Share Posted June 7, 2016 I just got tired of the joke. Carry on. Nothing to see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caze Posted June 7, 2016 Share Posted June 7, 2016 lol, stolen. bronie sanderp did far better than he had any right to do, good effort. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts