Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Let's say you don't like either presidential candidate. Who would you like see as president?

Not Gary Johnson anyway. The man is dumb as shit.

Stephen Colbert. He's about the only one who's political opinions i trust whether i agree with them or not.

I would like Bill Maher just for giggles.

Arnie.

Bernie Sanders, that's who.

Going to laugh at the DNC if Trump ends up winning for backing that little perfect troll-like man. Sanders could absolutely have beaten Trump.

Why are you not laughing at the DNC already. How is Hillary not a troll? She is the ultimate troll, she just trolls our laws and shreds evidence, then laughs and says "what difference does it make."

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Why are you not laughing at the DNC already. How is Hillary not a troll? She is the ultimate troll, she just trolls our laws and shreds evidence, then laughs and says "what difference does it make." To give credit where it's due, YOU are the ultimate troll.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Why are you not laughing at the DNC already. How is Hillary not a troll? She is the ultimate troll, she just trolls our laws and shreds evidence, then laughs and says "what difference does it make." Because Trump hasn't won.

When I called Sanders "troll-like", I meant his appearance and it was done in an amicable fashion.

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
To give credit where it's due, YOU are the ultimate troll.


Look at your sig, vs mine. Who is the troll?

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Look at your sig, vs mine. Who is the troll? You. It's always been you.

Says the guy attacking me for no reason. Right.

No attack, I give you kudos. You are Master Troll.

Originally posted by Robtard
Because Trump hasn't won.

When I called Sanders "troll-like", I meant his appearance and it was done in an amicable fashion.

I am not talking about Trump, but she would be the ultimate troll. Think about it, every time she gets involved in something she mucks it up, like Powell said.

I mean if you can think of 3 things she has done right that had any real lasting impact that did not result in a disaster name them.

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
No attack, I give you kudos. You are Master Troll.

I dont know why I even bothered to take you off ignore. Thought I would give you the benefit of the doubt.

Mr. Garrison:
p1xiAXMqJIQ

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
I dont know why I even bothered to take you off ignore. Thought I would give you the benefit of the doubt.

Not telling you how to think towards what LL is saying, but I've been called similar and I took it as a complement; if you're going to do something, might as well be excellent at it.

Why I've told quanchi before that if he would put as much effort and ingenuity into his trolling as he does his cock-suckings, he'd be a master troll.

Hmm mm. And TI is a master troll. Or just really dumb. But I'll give him the benefit of the doubt.

Keep it coming LL. What else you got?

Socks? How about some socks? Or do you have plenty already?

Who knows, I could be Obama

Don't let Politico hear you say that, he'd be so mad at you.

Im sure, what else you got?

You, all worked up.

Strange, Im cooking food and watching TMZ

But believe what you want

What else you got?

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Im... watching TMZ Precious.

Atta boy

So, real question: are you a nationalist?

I'm a democratic nationalist

You seem fairly militant. Aside from the default loyalty that being born in your country provides, what's the basis for this hardline nationalism?

Yea I am very militant. I care about the people here. The US is the highest taxed nation on the world for its size, yet we can't even keep up with infrastructure. We need $100 billion a year just to maintain the roads we have. The budget is $91 billion.

Infrastructure spending is about $463 billion a year and we just had a train run through Hoboken NJ due to faulty systems.

Roads and bridges are unsafe and literally have collapsed.

The airports are a mess.

We have to focus on America First and right the ship, then get back to takeninf care of the restoration do the world.

Our foreign aid is in the hundreds of billions a year.

We give Guatamaula alone $150 billion ayear and they have a population of 15 million people. How does that make sense?

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Yea I am very militant. I care about the people here. Well... not all of them.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
The US is the highest taxed nation on the world for its sizeCan you clarify that?

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Our foreign aid is in the hundreds of billions a year. Can you quote me a cite please? I'm scouring the Googles and can't find anything that puts U.S. Foreign Aid that high. As a percentage of the National Budget (2015's was $3.7 trillion), the U.S. spends less than 1% on Aid. 2014's was the last fully reported year on Foreign Aid. This graphic from USAID shows where the money goes. That year, the U.S. gave a total of $43 billion to aid, and it was actually the lowest amount since 2006.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
We give Guatamaula alone $150 billion ayear and they have a population of 15 million people. How does that make sense? You mean $150 million.


The parts of your post I didn't quote I generally agree with. Especially about your infrastructure, it's a goddamn disaster. But for comparison's sake, contrast Foreign Aid (<1% of the budget), to the defense budget (16% for 2015). Imagine if that was lowered to even 15%. That would be $42 billion extra you'd have to devote more worthy causes like infrastructure.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Yea I am very militant. I care about the people here. The US is the highest taxed nation on the world for its size, yet we can't even keep up with infrastructure. We need $100 billion a year just to maintain the roads we have. The budget is $91 billion.

Infrastructure spending is about $463 billion a year and we just had a train run through Hoboken NJ due to faulty systems.

Roads and bridges are unsafe and literally have collapsed.

The airports are a mess.

We have to focus on America First and right the ship, then get back to takeninf care of the restoration do the world.

Our foreign aid is in the hundreds of billions a year.

We give Guatamaula alone $150 billion ayear and they have a population of 15 million people. How does that make sense?

That all ties in with the social contract of willingness to pay taxes. Unfortunately there's no longer the connection between corporations and the regions where they operate. It used to be that there was an incentive to pay taxes to invest in infrastructure because companies relied on that infrastructure to make them profitable because their factories, head offices etc were all in the same location along with their workforce. Now you have global corporations with factories in developing countries for cheap labour, head offices in western countries for a higher standard of living for the executives and registered offices in tax havens to avoid paying taxes. There's no incentive to abide by the social contract anymore.

You then get the situation where the working class are made unemployed so are taken out of tax generation and an elite who have massive earnings but use loopholes to get out of paying as much taxes as they can. The tax burden gets put on the middle classes who politicians are reluctant to increase taxes on as they're the ones who vote so administrations borrow to plug the spending gap and can't afford to maintain let alone invest in new infrastructure projects and all the while increase the debt and take more money away from the pot available for investment.

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
Well... not all of them.

Can you clarify that?

Can you quote me a cite please? I'm scouring the Googles and can't find anything that puts U.S. Foreign Aid that high. As a percentage of the National Budget (2015's was $3.7 trillion), the U.S. spends less than 1% on Aid. 2014's was the last fully reported year on Foreign Aid. This graphic from USAID shows where the money goes. That year, the U.S. gave a total of $43 billion to aid, and it was actually the lowest amount since 2006.

You mean $150 million.


The parts of your post I didn't quote I generally agree with. Especially about your infrastructure, it's a goddamn disaster. But for comparison's sake, contrast Foreign Aid (<1% of the budget), to the defense budget (16% for 2015). Imagine if that was lowered to even 15%. That would be $42 billion extra you'd have to devote more worthy causes like infrastructure.


You are right, I mean billions. I know I have seen other US aid numbers. I will try and find them later on. But for now let's go with what you presented.

If the roads budget is $91 billion and it needs to be $100 billion, where is the rest going to come from? Also the $100 billion needed is just to keep up with maintenance. Not for innovation and to expand with the growing population.

You mean, millions? 150 million to Guatemala?

And the additional money for infrastructure could be taken out of the defense budget. I don't see a need to keep it at $637 billion.

Yes millions, and I know for a fact we went Honduras a shit ton of money like at least $100 million or more since 2012, and they have only 8 million people. Why on earth do they need $100 million for 8 million people. We would be better off giving each person a million dollars so they could gtfo of there.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Yes millions, and I know for a fact we went Honduras a shit ton of money like at least $100 million or more since 2012, and they have only 8 million people. Why on earth do they need $100 million for 8 million people. Here's a breakdown of the $86.6 million the U.S. gave to Honduras in 2012.

If you were to lump $100 million on to their GDP, then their Per Capita would only rise about $13. It's chump change to give. That wouldn't put a dent in the U.S. defence budget.

I know a lot of Americans in need that could use $100 million. Yes 86.6 plus all the other aid, it's over $100 million just for 2012, what about 13, 14, 15 and 2016.

Probably around $100 million. These stats seem to need a few years to be reported. If that money was being given to a couple of Hondurans, then I'd be pissed too. But it's not. Again, as an Aid payment to an entire country, it's not very much. It's 1/37,000ths of the 2015 Federal Budget. Insignificant.

I'm all in favour of spending a country's money, ya know, on that country. But I think it's a failing for a superpower as overwhelmingly influential and rich as the U.S. to help literally nobody besides itself. Which is almost what the U.S. is currently doing. Again, you guys are only spending 0.19% of your budget on others. Less than 1/5 of 1/100.

And we are $20 trillion in debt. And we have not even started really. Once we hit $30-40 trillion everything goes bust.

Any way to get numbers from 2012-2016 on all foreign aid? Or can we assume if it was $100 million in 2012, it's more or less the same every year?

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
And we are $20 trillion in debt. And we have not even started really. Once we hit $30-40 trillion everything goes bust.

Any way to get numbers from 2012-2016 on all foreign aid? Or can we assume if it was $100 million in 2012, it's more or less the same every year? The debt is huge, yes. But a country's debt is very different than a person or company's debt. Of the $19.5 trillion the U.S. owes, $14.1 trillion of it is to... itself. The American people and government. Essentially, the large majority of American debt is owned by America. The remaining $5.3 trillion is owned by other countries (intragovernmental holdings). What's the threat at $30-40 trillion?



According to USAID, it was $95 million in 2015. The final tally for this year isn't in, but they have recorded $17.5 million.

The debt is actually held by the federal reserve, a private enterprise, they loan us the money at interest. Literally as soon as a dollar is printed, we owe them that dollar plus interest.

The Fed isn't the same type of private company as other banks or corporations. Most of the Fed's profits go back to the U.S. Treasury. It's a murky enterprise. But it doesn't change the fact that American debt is mostly owned by Americans.

The debt notwithstanding, there's no reason to slash the meagre funding that USAID gets. $43 billion dollars is nothing. Completely eliminating Foreign Aid will do jack shit to the debt.

I'm not pleased with the fed when the constitution gives congress the power to coin and print money. The federal reserve act and fractional reserve banking in my opinion is the biggest fraud pulled on the American people.

Not that it's going to change any time soon. Or ever. But it's a cassus belli I can at least respect. It's not about taking away money from Aid foundations, or slashing NASA's budget, or condemning immigrants, or waging trillion dollar wars in the Middle East. Fiscal reform is an underrated form of activism.



Though as a Canadian, I am absolutely in favour of the federal government controlling the currency.

Why though?

WtRiKFrqgMc

An inherent distrust of private business owners' intentions and desires as they encounter the well being of the economy and the people.

Had you ever seen that video?

I've seen this one:


lm0f1eWOwmc


Specifically at 1:42 where she says "We stop borrowing from private banks and start borrowing from the Bank of Canada with little to no interest."

So is she wrong iyo?

This is interesting, I just came across it. Talking alot about USAID.

http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/09/29/hillary-clintons-state-department-spent-millions-taxpayer-dollars-help-companies-outsource-american-tech-jobs/

No I do agree with her. Or whatever documentary she's paraphrasing.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
This is interesting, I just came across it. Talking alot about USAID.

http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/09/29/hillary-clintons-state-department-spent-millions-taxpayer-dollars-help-companies-outsource-american-tech-jobs/ Do you think that American companies should be legally forced to keep manufacturing, service, and tech jobs inside the States?

No but if they want to leave, don't expect to bring it back tax free with trump.

Why should companies leave, to avoid taxes and fire American workers and make their product for cheaper then be able bring it back tax feee while they have their corporate office in Ireland.

In a nutshell. What piece of that current dynamic would you want the government to change?

For starters. Cut the corporate tax rate to 10-15% to bring global business and keep corporations and manufacturing here.

All good. As long as you don't start throwing the term "deregulate" around.


EDIT: Mild probing has revealed to me that American corporate tax rates are marginal. The Tax Rate Schedule has an ascending scale starting at 15% going steadily up to a maximum of 35%. Do you want all corporate tax rates to be set to a flat rate?

Thats a lot of pages to go through, what page are you on? Im heading to bed.

Originally posted by Facee
I would like Bill Maher just for giggles.
^^^That would NOT be boring!
your new sig looks great, BTW.

Speaking of looks, this entire page just looks hilarious to me.
http://i.imgur.com/Qwl6HkS.jpg

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Thats a lot of pages to go through, what page are you on? Im heading to bed. Page 17, the Tax Rate Schedule chart.

Ok ill in am

Originally posted by riv6672
^^^That would NOT be boring!
your new sig looks great, BTW.

Speaking of looks, this entire page just looks hilarious to me.
http://i.imgur.com/Qwl6HkS.jpg There's really no reason to make that post unless you're looking to get a reaction from people on your ignore list.

Everybody needs to stay on topic.

Originally posted by Facee
Let's say you don't like either presidential candidate. Who would you like see as president?

Trey Gowdy or Jeanine Pirro would've been good.

Lex Luthor.

You just like the letter L.

Originally posted by Robtard
Because Trump hasn't won.

When I called Sanders "troll-like", I meant his appearance and it was done in an amicable fashion.

Yeah and the strange this is..if Trump does something that happened 20 years ago it will be headline news.(Trump lost a lot of money in 1995!!!!!)

But I pretty much haven't heard any real explanations given as to why Hilary or her aides smashed up 13 blackberries with a hammer.

In your opinion: what reason do you feel a career politician running for president who has come under fire with an email scandal..would have her aides take a hammer to 13 blackberries?

I think the bigger question is, who's pulling the strings? Is it Hillary or Trump?

I'm still curious as to the explanation for why they would destroy 13 blackberries.

Originally posted by Surtur
I'm still curious as to the explanation for why they would destroy 13 blackberries.

They did not destroy 13 Blackberries, they destroyed two. And they did so, because it is the security policy of the State Department that when an electronic device is retired, it should have its data wiped, and its drive physically destroyed.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
They did not destroy 13 Blackberries, they destroyed two. And they did so, because it is the security policy of the State Department that when an electronic device is retired, it should have its data wiped, and its drive physically destroyed.

So the reports that it was far more than 2 are also lies?

Originally posted by Surtur
So the reports that it was far more than 2 are also lies?

Those same reports imply that there is something unscrupulous about complying with State Department security policy with regard to electronic devices to further an anti-Clinton agenda, so you do the math.

Well the only thing I would say that would make sense to be upset over it is if they destroyed the devices without sharing the data on them first.

If the data was shared, then they wiped, then they destroyed it..yes, that really shouldn't be an issue.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rpm4rjejFgQ

This is kinda funny.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Those same reports imply that there is something unscrupulous about complying with State Department security policy with regard to electronic devices to further an anti-Clinton agenda, so you do the math.

But hey you seem to have an answer for every single potentially shady thing these people do, so perhaps you can explain why Obama was emailing her under a pseudonym on an email he said he didn't know about?

It's possible he didn't know the email he was responding to was the one she lied about, but I'm still curious as to why the pseudonym then. Is this standard operating procedure?

I'd wait for the media to explain it, but you see Trump was vulgar and shit to women so this story will get lost in the shuffle because..vulgar, you see.

Originally posted by Surtur
But hey you seem to have an answer for every single potentially shady thing these people do, so perhaps you can explain why Obama was emailing her under a pseudonym on an email he said he didn't know about?

It's possible he didn't know the email he was responding to was the one she lied about, but I'm still curious as to why the pseudonym then. Is this standard operating procedure?

I'd wait for the media to explain it, but you see Trump was vulgar and shit to women so this story will get lost in the shuffle because..vulgar, you see.

It is a State Department security measure to protect the email addresses of cabinet secretaries and select administration officials.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zRogXTFtpUc

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
It is a State Department security measure to protect the email addresses of cabinet secretaries and select administration officials.

I see, so they use pseudonym's 100% of the time, then?

Originally posted by Its2016
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zRogXTFtpUc

It's nice, but irrelevant. Words>>Actions. It's why people see Hilary as the lesser evil, they go by the words.

Im actually curious about this as well. Why did Obama use a pseudonym when talking to Clinton? What did Clinton actually say in her emails and why is she passing the buck whenever its mentioned? Trump may have questioned Obama's birthplace, but hes admitted he was wrong. Why has Clinton deleted her emails, and why is she so awkward when she talks about it? What exactly is going on?

Basically when she claims they turned over like 95% of her emails and then Trey Gowdy points out no it was actually less than 1%..that right there should have been the end of it. She's lying, and badly. She wasn't only a little bit off, but WAY off. It should have been the end for any chance at her becoming president.

Not only does she more or less get away with it, but some of her staff members are getting these sweet little immunity deals as well.

So if she wins the Presidency, we are essentially giving her a thumbs up when it comes to this behavior. If she can do all this and still become president than she can pretty much do whatever she wants.

People say Trump can get away with saying whatever he wants? Well ha f*ck that silly ass notion since these recent audio tapes show he can't, but Hilary gets away with shady actions, Trump gets away with shady words.

I only really know of her doing shady shit in Syria and Libya, especially the latter. This is kinda important, its a big deal. We know the Bushes were heavily involved in the middle east and its apparent that the Clintons and Bushes know each other and are part of the same circle. Is voting Clinton like having Jeb? Because thats what it feels like.

Why do people not care about destabilizing Libya, think about all the people dead no because of this.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Why do people not care about destabilizing Libya Because people don't actually give a shit about Libya, it's consequences, or even it's location on a map. They care about relevant buzzwords to post on Facebook and impress their peers by sounding topical and informed.

Hard to say what becomes of the country's political climate once the Clinton presidency ends. Since the 2010s we've see. A few grassroots movements like the Tea party, Occupy Wall st, among other groups that despise the political class- and we've seen upsurges for once fringe candidates like Ron Paul and Bernie Sanders reach record numbers of support. Obviously, it's not enough if idiots keep voting to elect scum like Clinton into office, and there isn't anything resembling a boiling point like we saw in the Arab spring, Brexit, or enough fury from the populace to actually elect someone that can change the corruption of government. What the **** happens now?

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
Because people don't actually give a shit about Libya, it's consequences, or even it's location on a map. They care about relevant buzzwords to post on Facebook and impress their peers by sounding topical and informed.

Well said

Originally posted by carthage
Hard to say what becomes of the country's political climate once the Clinton presidency ends. Since the 2010s we've see. A few grassroots movements like the Tea party, Occupy Wall st, among other groups that despise the political class- and we've seen upsurges for once fringe candidates like Ron Paul and Bernie Sanders reach record numbers of support. Obviously, it's not enough if idiots keep voting to elect scum like Clinton into office, and there isn't anything resembling a boiling point like we saw in the Arab spring, Brexit, or enough fury from the populace to actually elect someone that can change the corruption of government. What the **** happens now? Well The Walking Dead's back on soon...

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
Because people don't actually give a shit about Libya, it's consequences, or even it's location on a map. They care about relevant buzzwords to post on Facebook and impress their peers by sounding topical and informed. My problem is I humiliated people on Facebook over the Belgium bombings and Brexit. It was very funny, but I can see that they are unhappy with my constant raping of lefties. I may stop altogether.

Final note: The left cant meme. They just cant produce lulz or meme anything. #feelthebern and drumpf is the best it gets for them or they steal right wing memes.

Uh huh.

Is your profile pic a shaved hitler?

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Why do people not care about destabilizing Libya, think about all the people dead no because of this.

Can you guess what Libya's got?

Problems?

We've all got problems, but that's no excuse to topple my regime.

Wrong thread.