---

I didn't know there was a Melbourne in Florida but Trump managed to attract 10,000 there

Three times he's had rallies in Florida this month, drawing 8,000, 12,000 and now 10,000. The man has relentless energy for someone his age. It takes a lot of energy getting up in front of big crowds.

He told them they had 41 days to change America, to overthrow the powerful elites throwing millions at Clinton, to renew the inner cities, to give Blacks & Hispanics safe communities again.
And the crowd erupted with "USA USA".

Do the progressive rabble and their MSM mouthpieces really think Trump lost yesterday?
Michael Moore doesn't which is why he is pulling his hair out.

And I agree with him. Trump did exactly what he needed to do. And if he stays pleasant & stable through these debates he's got it in the bag.

Correction: WND says there was actually a crowd of 15000 at the Melbourne, Florida venue but a further 12000 had to be turned away for lack of space.

Since 1 August, they report, Trump rallies have drawn a total of over 300,000 people, many many times Clinton's audiences.

But then everybody knows deplorables breed like rabbits, isn't that so.

Another massive crowd for Trump
http://speakupforsuccess.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/audience-of-one5672689.jpg

..

Trump's Post Debate
Triumphant Melbourne Florida Rally


I think you're a bit confused there sonny-shine ..... that's the Hillary Rally Crowd you posted there above. https://i.imgsafe.org/c589185.gif

Here's the actual Trump Melbourne, Florida Rally Crowd (Proud Deplorables):


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8uDGa5_MtRQ

For safety precautions, & for the capacity crowd already inside, they actually had to turn away 12,000+ supporters. 

Hillary hasn't seen anything like that, not since she started her so called "campaigning", not in all her rallys combined!

https://s17.postimg.org/73w10tgrz/Melbourne_Florida_Rally.gif


..

Trump will do two events today in the battleground state of Colorado and turnouts in the tens of thousands are predicted.
Clinton was last here early August and struggled to fill a high school auditorium. Trump has been to the state several times.
Polls currently have him ahead.

bogarde73 wrote on Oct 4^th, 2016 at 7:13am:

Trump will do two events today in the battleground state of Colorado and turnouts in the tens of thousands are predicted. Clinton was last here early August and struggled to fill a high school auditorium. Trump has been to the state several times. Polls currently have him ahead.

You can feel it happening.

I can feel it going down to the wire to be honest.

And it worries me because I see this as the last chance virtually for the US - and because the US leads the west - the last chance for all of us to arrest the slide into a degenerate hedonistic society going in the wrong direction in almost every way.

bogarde73 wrote on Oct 4^th, 2016 at 9:53am:

I can feel it going down to the wire to be honest. And it worries me because I see this as the last chance virtually for the US - and because the US leads the west - the last chance for all of us to arrest the slide into a degenerate hedonistic society going in the wrong direction in almost every way.

On reflection I think I should have put that more strongly.
Not only will another 8 years of the Democrats, driven by their baggage train of every kind of freak, lead the west to a degenerate hedonistic society, it will also be a more crime-ridden, drug-fed, police-hating, Islam-welcoming, debt & welfare dependent foundering ship of state.

bogarde73 wrote on Oct 4^th, 2016 at 12:52pm:

bogarde73 wrote on Oct 4th, 2016 at 9:53am: I can feel it going down to the wire to be honest. And it worries me because I see this as the last chance virtually for the US - and because the US leads the west - the last chance for all of us to arrest the slide into a degenerate hedonistic society going in the wrong direction in almost every way. On reflection I think I should have put that more strongly. Not only will another 8 years of the Democrats, driven by their baggage train of every kind of freak, lead the west to a degenerate hedonistic society, it will also be a more crime-ridden, drug-fed, police-hating, Islam-welcoming, debt & welfare dependent foundering ship of state.

It's never gonna happen, but just humour me for a minute: what would 8 years of Trump look like, and how would he achieve whatever it is you think he might achieve?

The Presidency is there for Trumps taking but he now appears to be deliberately attempting to lose.

rhino wrote on Oct 4^th, 2016 at 1:00pm:

The Presidency is there for Trumps taking but he now appears to be deliberately attempting to lose.

Wrong on the first point, but correct on the second.

You're learning, grasshopper.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/7b/Caine_and_Master_Po.jpg

Clintons got massive health issues, no doubt someone will be pulling the strings there. wonder whos pulling Trumps strings. At this stage he looked unbeatable, right up until his huge gaffe about US military not being strong enough to handle PTSD, that was definitely scripted.

greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 4^th, 2016 at 12:57pm:

bogarde73 wrote on Oct 4th, 2016 at 12:52pm: bogarde73 wrote on Oct 4th, 2016 at 9:53am: I can feel it going down to the wire to be honest. And it worries me because I see this as the last chance virtually for the US - and because the US leads the west - the last chance for all of us to arrest the slide into a degenerate hedonistic society going in the wrong direction in almost every way. On reflection I think I should have put that more strongly. Not only will another 8 years of the Democrats, driven by their baggage train of every kind of freak, lead the west to a degenerate hedonistic society, it will also be a more crime-ridden, drug-fed, police-hating, Islam-welcoming, debt & welfare dependent foundering ship of state. It's never gonna happen, but just humour me for a minute: what would 8 years of Trump look like, and how would he achieve whatever it is you think he might achieve?

Easy - America would be great again.
Illegal immigration would stop there and elsewhere, sending jobs and money to unfairly playing countries like China would significantly diminish, meaning more and better jobs for Americans, meaning less debt.
People will openly laugh at all the stupid lefty causes like trigger warnings and race-baiting. Laws would be enforced, the military would be used as a military force not as society-building charity overseas.

Overall Western societies, beginning with America, will start to swing back to the centre, away from the stupid lefty idiocies that seem to be propping up every day.

bogarde73 wrote on Oct 4^th, 2016 at 12:52pm:

bogarde73 wrote on Oct 4th, 2016 at 9:53am: I can feel it going down to the wire to be honest. And it worries me because I see this as the last chance virtually for the US - and because the US leads the west - the last chance for all of us to arrest the slide into a degenerate hedonistic society going in the wrong direction in almost every way. On reflection I think I should have put that more strongly. Not only will another 8 years of the Democrats, driven by their baggage train of every kind of freak, lead the west to a degenerate hedonistic society, it will also be a more crime-ridden, drug-fed, police-hating, Islam-welcoming, debt & welfare dependent foundering ship of state.

that would be the case with the demos having another 8 years.
Americans would be leaving the USA en masse.

What a sad thought.

Greg, what it would look like - and of course it wouldn't itself be enough - is a slowdown & reversal of legislation squeezing the life out of nations; a start on rebuilding the inner cities for the blacks & Hispanics in particular; a simultaneous cleaning out of crime and putting the police back in charge of the streets, like Gulianni did; bringing corporate America to heel, in particular making them understand it will hurt to export jobs; making trade agreements work for American jobs; and finally, and most importantly, stopping the steady influx of Muslims into the country. How much time have you got?
On top of that, showing Europe etc that if America can do it, so can they.

Frank wrote on Oct 4^th, 2016 at 1:10pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 4th, 2016 at 12:57pm: bogarde73 wrote on Oct 4th, 2016 at 12:52pm: bogarde73 wrote on Oct 4th, 2016 at 9:53am: I can feel it going down to the wire to be honest. And it worries me because I see this as the last chance virtually for the US - and because the US leads the west - the last chance for all of us to arrest the slide into a degenerate hedonistic society going in the wrong direction in almost every way. On reflection I think I should have put that more strongly. Not only will another 8 years of the Democrats, driven by their baggage train of every kind of freak, lead the west to a degenerate hedonistic society, it will also be a more crime-ridden, drug-fed, police-hating, Islam-welcoming, debt & welfare dependent foundering ship of state. It's never gonna happen, but just humour me for a minute: what would 8 years of Trump look like, and how would he achieve whatever it is you think he might achieve? Easy - America would be great again. Illegal immigration would stop there and elsewhere, sending jobs and money to unfairly playing countries like China would significantly diminish, meaning more and better jobs for Americans, meaning less debt. People will openly laugh at all the stupid lefty causes like trigger warnings and race-baiting. Laws would be enforced, the military would be used as a military force not as society-building charity overseas. Overall Western societies, beginning with America, will start to swing back to the centre, away from the stupid lefty idiocies that seem to be propping up every day.

You missed a bit.

"how would he achieve whatever it is you think he might achieve?"

http://www.20cents-video.com/userdata/animated-gif/library/MAGIC_WAND_Animation.gif

Its almost worth seeing Trump elected just to prove how delusional his fanboys really are.

...almost

greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 4^th, 2016 at 1:17pm:

"how would he achieve whatever it is you think he might achieve?"

With Executive Orders

Bias_2012 wrote on Oct 4^th, 2016 at 3:13pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 4th, 2016 at 1:17pm: "how would he achieve whatever it is you think he might achieve?" With Executive Orders

https://media.giphy.com/media/G1Zu26ae7mZr2/giphy.gif

polite_gandalf wrote on Oct 4^th, 2016 at 2:48pm:

Its almost worth seeing Trump elected just to prove how delusional his fanboys really are. ...almost

Indeed.

However, as big a douche bag and creep that Trump is, he isn't completely stupid.

He knows that he's not up to the job, and he knows that he would go down in history as the worst head of state that the planet has ever seen.

He was playing a game to see how far he could get, and now he's slowly pulling out of the race.

I predicted this from the very start, and I've been right all along.

He will never, ever become POTUS.

He never really wanted to be.

https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2016/10/trump-loveland-2.jpg

Trump at Loveland Colorado Oct 03

greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 4^th, 2016 at 3:29pm:

He knows that he's not up to the job, and he knows that he would go down in history as the worst head of state that the planet has ever seen. He was playing a game to see how far he could get, and now he's slowly pulling out of the race. I predicted this from the very start, and I've been right all along. He will never, ever become POTUS. He never really wanted to be.

You are stupider than Brian, I give you that.

And that's like the stupid jackpot.


Congratulations.

greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 4^th, 2016 at 1:17pm:

Frank wrote on Oct 4th, 2016 at 1:10pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 4th, 2016 at 12:57pm: bogarde73 wrote on Oct 4th, 2016 at 12:52pm: bogarde73 wrote on Oct 4th, 2016 at 9:53am: I can feel it going down to the wire to be honest. And it worries me because I see this as the last chance virtually for the US - and because the US leads the west - the last chance for all of us to arrest the slide into a degenerate hedonistic society going in the wrong direction in almost every way. On reflection I think I should have put that more strongly. Not only will another 8 years of the Democrats, driven by their baggage train of every kind of freak, lead the west to a degenerate hedonistic society, it will also be a more crime-ridden, drug-fed, police-hating, Islam-welcoming, debt & welfare dependent foundering ship of state. It's never gonna happen, but just humour me for a minute: what would 8 years of Trump look like, and how would he achieve whatever it is you think he might achieve? Easy - America would be great again. Illegal immigration would stop there and elsewhere, sending jobs and money to unfairly playing countries like China would significantly diminish, meaning more and better jobs for Americans, meaning less debt. People will openly laugh at all the stupid lefty causes like trigger warnings and race-baiting. Laws would be enforced, the military would be used as a military force not as society-building charity overseas. Overall Western societies, beginning with America, will start to swing back to the centre, away from the stupid lefty idiocies that seem to be propping up every day. You missed a bit. "how would he achieve whatever it is you think he might achieve?" http://www.20cents-video.com/userdata/animated-gif/library/MAGIC_WAND_Animation.gif

I gave you a couple of points in response to your question and all you have is another inane gif.

You can give Brian lessons in stupid and charge him.

Frank wrote on Oct 4^th, 2016 at 9:08pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 4th, 2016 at 3:29pm: He knows that he's not up to the job, and he knows that he would go down in history as the worst head of state that the planet has ever seen. He was playing a game to see how far he could get, and now he's slowly pulling out of the race. I predicted this from the very start, and I've been right all along. He will never, ever become POTUS. He never really wanted to be. You are stupider than Brian, I give you that. And that's like the stupid jackpot. Congratulations.

I am 100% correct, and I predicted it right from the start.

You're going to look very foolish, come November.

Well, more foolish than usual.

polite_gandalf wrote on Oct 4^th, 2016 at 2:48pm:

Its almost worth seeing Trump elected just to prove how delusional his fanboys really are. ...almost

Someone who believes in Islam is qualified to tell people who think Trump is preferable to Clinton that they are delusional?
Really?

https://youtu.be/W-VzSG-2oYI

Trump vs Hillary rallies - What you DON'T see on TV

Frank wrote on Oct 4^th, 2016 at 1:10pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 4th, 2016 at 12:57pm: bogarde73 wrote on Oct 4th, 2016 at 12:52pm: bogarde73 wrote on Oct 4th, 2016 at 9:53am: I can feel it going down to the wire to be honest. And it worries me because I see this as the last chance virtually for the US - and because the US leads the west - the last chance for all of us to arrest the slide into a degenerate hedonistic society going in the wrong direction in almost every way. On reflection I think I should have put that more strongly. Not only will another 8 years of the Democrats, driven by their baggage train of every kind of freak, lead the west to a degenerate hedonistic society, it will also be a more crime-ridden, drug-fed, police-hating, Islam-welcoming, debt & welfare dependent foundering ship of state. It's never gonna happen, but just humour me for a minute: what would 8 years of Trump look like, and how would he achieve whatever it is you think he might achieve? Easy - America would be great again. Illegal immigration would stop there and elsewhere, sending jobs and money to unfairly playing countries like China would significantly diminish, meaning more and better jobs for Americans, meaning less debt. People will openly laugh at all the stupid lefty causes like trigger warnings and race-baiting. Laws would be enforced, the military would be used as a military force not as society-building charity overseas. Overall Western societies, beginning with America, will start to swing back to the centre, away from the stupid lefty idiocies that seem to be propping up every day.

Not even the old boy believes this.

Mind you, he once thought Abbott was going to deliver on these things too.

And I love returning to the centre - the centre as envisaged by David Duke.

What a tall glass of Lutheran water the old boy is.

Yes, the Trump crowd. The best America has to offer.

https://youtu.be/Y4Zdx97A63s

I give up on America
You can all wallow in the sewerage pool that Abu bin and the Clinton's and their freak show train have created for you.

will somebody stick a fork in Trump already? he's done.

AiA wrote on Oct 15^th, 2016 at 8:19am:

will somebody stick a fork in Trump already? he's done.

He's done alright.

The bloated orange douche bag is history.

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/e3/0c/a4/e30ca4b6bee18574fbfe2736a4943429.jpg

bogarde73 wrote on Oct 15^th, 2016 at 6:47am:

I give up on America You can all wallow in the sewerage pool that Abu bin and the Clinton's and their freak show train have created for you.

You're slways free to come back to Australia, Bogie.

We grew here you flew here, no?

Bias_2012 wrote on Oct 4^th, 2016 at 3:13pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 4th, 2016 at 1:17pm: "how would he achieve whatever it is you think he might achieve?" With Executive Orders

By putting America first.

bogarde73 wrote on Oct 4^th, 2016 at 1:15pm:

Greg, what it would look like - and of course it wouldn't itself be enough - is a slowdown & reversal of legislation squeezing the life out of nations; a start on rebuilding the inner cities for the blacks & Hispanics in particular; a simultaneous cleaning out of crime and putting the police back in charge of the streets, like Gulianni did; bringing corporate America to heel, in particular making them understand it will hurt to export jobs; making trade agreements work for American jobs; and finally, and most importantly, stopping the steady influx of Muslims into the country. How much time have you got? On top of that, showing Europe etc that if America can do it, so can they.

Post of the Day.

bogarde73 wrote on Oct 4^th, 2016 at 1:15pm:

Greg, what it would look like - and of course it wouldn't itself be enough - is a slowdown & reversal of legislation squeezing the life out of nations; a start on rebuilding the inner cities for the blacks & Hispanics in particular; a simultaneous cleaning out of crime and putting the police back in charge of the streets, like Gulianni did; bringing corporate America to heel, in particular making them understand it will hurt to export jobs; making trade agreements work for American jobs; and finally, and most importantly, stopping the steady influx of Muslims into the country. How much time have you got? On top of that, showing Europe etc that if America can do it, so can they.

There are more police shootings now than at any time in US history.  Various inner cities have become a militarised war zone, not unlike Iraq, where police get their demobilised weapons and armoured trucks from. The police response to drugs and street crime in the US has been a massive failure. Forget the cost - almost 400 billion this year alone. Policing and private security is now a major problem in the US. Killings by police of innocent bystanders, incarceration rates, and the overall budget is the highest in US history. Despite this, the cause of crime has not changed at all. Drugs - black tar heroin and ice - are at epidemic levels.

Gulianni's police response to New York crime in the 1990s was pointless and repressive. Crime dropped there due to rising property prices. The ghettoes were sold off and crime moved elsewhere. The phenomenon known as the "great crime drop" of the 1990s occurred throughout the developed world. No one has come up with an easy answer as to why this occurred, although in the US, the economic boom brought on by the lifting of trade and credit restrictions, new technology and the gentrification of large inner cities like New York, were major factors.

Crime crackdowns and the mass incarceration of blacks and Hispanics have been a major failure in the US. The War Against Drugs has been lost. Trump has been proven guilty of telling porkies about crime. His 81% of whites are killed by blacks figure, quoted by the knuckleheads here, was a lie. In reality, 81% of whites are killed by whites, but Trump is the sort of guy who can turn white into black, black into white.

Believe the reverse of what Trump says, and you're far more likely to get closer to the truth. In reality, Trump can't afford the sort of tough-on-crime policies he's bluffing about - and certainly not with the 50% reduction in corporate tax he's promising billionaires like himself. In reality, such policies would kill and incarcerate even more millions, with no impact on drug crime whatsoever. And in reality, blacks and Hispanics would not be better off with Trump's agenda. Many of their neighbourhoods are already occupied by a military police presence that shoots first and asks questions later. They already fill the jails of America on mandatory three-strikes sentences for minor drug posession while those who can afford lawyers - like Trump - go free.

Alas, Bogie, such an agenda will never come to pass. Trump's been caught out. And yes, you've been caught out too. Your paranoid stance on crime and race - and its "solution" - have been proven to be false. While you'd love to see a war against blacks and Hispanics in the US, you can't possibly win. The drugs, the crime, but most importantly the poverty, will remain, whether you shift it from Harlem to the.Bronx, from the blacks to the whites, or around and around in circles.

America will only ever become great again by giving the poor a greater share of the pie, but Trump will never tell you that.

Karnal wrote on Oct 15^th, 2016 at 6:21pm:

bogarde73 wrote on Oct 4th, 2016 at 1:15pm: Greg, what it would look like - and of course it wouldn't itself be enough - is a slowdown & reversal of legislation squeezing the life out of nations; a start on rebuilding the inner cities for the blacks & Hispanics in particular; a simultaneous cleaning out of crime and putting the police back in charge of the streets, like Gulianni did; bringing corporate America to heel, in particular making them understand it will hurt to export jobs; making trade agreements work for American jobs; and finally, and most importantly, stopping the steady influx of Muslims into the country. How much time have you got? On top of that, showing Europe etc that if America can do it, so can they. There are more police shootings now than at any time in US history.  Various inner cities have become a militarised war zone, not unlike Iraq, where police get their demobilised weapions and armoured trucks from. The police response to drugs and street crime in the US has been a massive failure. Forget the cost - almost 400 billion this year alone. The police themselves are now a major problem in the US. Killings by police of innocent bystanders, incarceration rates, and the overall budget is the highest in US history. Despite this, the cause of crime has not changed at all. Gulianni's police response to New York crime in the 1990s was equally pointless and repressive. Crime dropped there due to rising property prices. The ghettoes were sold off and crime moved elsewhere. The phenomenon known as the "great crime drop" of the 1990s occurred throughout the developed world. No one has come up with an easy answer as to why this occurred, although in the US, the economic boom brought on by new tevhnology and the gentrification of large inner cities like New York were a major factor. Locking up blacks and Hispanics on mass has been a major failure in the US. The War Against Drugs has been lost. Trump has been proven guilty of telling porkies about crime. His 81% of whites are killed by blacks figure, quoted by the knuckleheads here, was a lie. In reality, 81% of whites are killed by whites, but Trump is the sort of guy who can turn white into black, black into white. Believe the reverse of what Trump says, and you're far more likely to understand the truth. In reality, Trump can't afford the sort of tough-on-crime policy he's bluffing about - and certainly not with the 50% reduction in corporate tax he's promising billionaires like himself. In reality, such a policy would kill and incarcerate even more millions, with no impact on drug crime whatsoever. And in reality, blacks and Hispanics would not be better off with Trump's agenda. Many of their neighbourhoods are already occupied by a military police presence that shoots first and asks questions later. They already fill the jails of America on mandatory three-strikes sentences for minor drug posession. Alas, Bogie, such an agenda will never come to pass. Trump's been caught out. And yes, you've been caught out too. Your paranoid stance on crime and race - and its "solution" - have been proven to be false. While you'd love to see a war against blacks and Hispanics in the US, you can't possibly win. The drugs, the crime, but most importantly the poverty, will remain, whether you shift it from Harlem to the Bronx and lock blacks up for jaywalking or not. America will only ever become great again by giving the poor a greater share of the pie, but Trump will never tell you that.

So how is Hillary going to fix the situation?

Hillary won't either, Homo. I doubt anyone will. The US is slowly declining.

Believe it or not though, the most prosperous period for the US in living memory was during Bill Clinton's "it's the economy, stupid" administration.

Karnal wrote on Oct 15^th, 2016 at 6:47pm:

Hillary won't either, Homo. I doubt anyone will. The US is slowly declining. Believe it or not though, the most prosperous period for the US in living memory was during Bill Clinton's "it's the economy, stupid" administration.

So you'd rather the failed status quo over Trump. That figures. Not a gambler are you sugar muffin. It's vegemite on dry white toast for people like you. :-X

Mr Hammer wrote on Oct 15^th, 2016 at 6:51pm:

Karnal wrote on Oct 15th, 2016 at 6:47pm: Hillary won't either, Homo. I doubt anyone will. The US is slowly declining. Believe it or not though, the most prosperous period for the US in living memory was during Bill Clinton's "it's the economy, stupid" administration. So you'd rather the failed status quo over Trump.

That's a cliche, Homo. Do you know what it means?

Try telling us what you mean by status quo - and what you mean by failed.

Another massive crowd for Trump

Yes it's always sad when the crowds start turning up to watch something die.

Karnal wrote on Oct 15^th, 2016 at 6:54pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Oct 15th, 2016 at 6:51pm: Karnal wrote on Oct 15th, 2016 at 6:47pm: Hillary won't either, Homo. I doubt anyone will. The US is slowly declining. Believe it or not though, the most prosperous period for the US in living memory was during Bill Clinton's "it's the economy, stupid" administration. So you'd rather the failed status quo over Trump. That's a cliche, Homo. Do you know what it means? Try telling us what you mean by status quo - and what you mean by failed.

Same old same old dear.  ::) Failed leftist socialist treacherous governments. Like the last Labor Party or Merkal's government. The same ones who look after any minority rather  than the white majority.

Mr Hammer wrote on Oct 15^th, 2016 at 6:59pm:

Karnal wrote on Oct 15th, 2016 at 6:54pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Oct 15th, 2016 at 6:51pm: Karnal wrote on Oct 15th, 2016 at 6:47pm: Hillary won't either, Homo. I doubt anyone will. The US is slowly declining. Believe it or not though, the most prosperous period for the US in living memory was during Bill Clinton's "it's the economy, stupid" administration. So you'd rather the failed status quo over Trump. That's a cliche, Homo. Do you know what it means? Try telling us what you mean by status quo - and what you mean by failed. Same old same old dear.  ::) Failed leftist socialist treacherous governments. Like the last Labor Party or Merkal's government. The same ones who look after any minority rather  than the white majority.

I see. So what are Hillary's policies, Homo? I've just addressed some of Trump's.

What does Hillary say she'll do? I've asked Herbie and Sprint, but they didn't answer.

Do you know?

Karnal wrote on Oct 15^th, 2016 at 7:04pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Oct 15th, 2016 at 6:59pm: Karnal wrote on Oct 15th, 2016 at 6:54pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Oct 15th, 2016 at 6:51pm: Karnal wrote on Oct 15th, 2016 at 6:47pm: Hillary won't either, Homo. I doubt anyone will. The US is slowly declining. Believe it or not though, the most prosperous period for the US in living memory was during Bill Clinton's "it's the economy, stupid" administration. So you'd rather the failed status quo over Trump. That's a cliche, Homo. Do you know what it means? Try telling us what you mean by status quo - and what you mean by failed. Same old same old dear.  ::) Failed leftist socialist treacherous governments. Like the last Labor Party or Merkal's government. The same ones who look after any minority rather  than the white majority. I see. So what are Hillary's policies, Homo? I've just addressed some of Trump's. What does Hillary say she'll do? I've asked Herbie and Sprint, but they didn't answer. Do you know?

She's about to fill America up with loads of Syrian refuges who will never integrate and will produce terrorists. She will not fix America's southern border which is responsible for a load of their crime. Nothing will get fixed. It's the same thing they have now. deterioration.

Mr Hammer wrote on Oct 15^th, 2016 at 7:10pm:

Karnal wrote on Oct 15th, 2016 at 7:04pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Oct 15th, 2016 at 6:59pm: Karnal wrote on Oct 15th, 2016 at 6:54pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Oct 15th, 2016 at 6:51pm: Karnal wrote on Oct 15th, 2016 at 6:47pm: Hillary won't either, Homo. I doubt anyone will. The US is slowly declining. Believe it or not though, the most prosperous period for the US in living memory was during Bill Clinton's "it's the economy, stupid" administration. So you'd rather the failed status quo over Trump. That's a cliche, Homo. Do you know what it means? Try telling us what you mean by status quo - and what you mean by failed. Same old same old dear.  ::) Failed leftist socialist treacherous governments. Like the last Labor Party or Merkal's government. The same ones who look after any minority rather  than the white majority. I see. So what are Hillary's policies, Homo? I've just addressed some of Trump's. What does Hillary say she'll do? I've asked Herbie and Sprint, but they didn't answer. Do you know? She's about to fill America up with loads of Syrian refuges who will never integrate and will produce terrorists. She will not fix America's southern border which is responsible for a load of their crime. Nothing will get fixed. It's the same thing they have now. deterioration.

No, Homo, tell us her economic and criminal policies.

Cheers.

Karnal wrote on Oct 15^th, 2016 at 7:29pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Oct 15th, 2016 at 7:10pm: Karnal wrote on Oct 15th, 2016 at 7:04pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Oct 15th, 2016 at 6:59pm: Karnal wrote on Oct 15th, 2016 at 6:54pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Oct 15th, 2016 at 6:51pm: Karnal wrote on Oct 15th, 2016 at 6:47pm: Hillary won't either, Homo. I doubt anyone will. The US is slowly declining. Believe it or not though, the most prosperous period for the US in living memory was during Bill Clinton's "it's the economy, stupid" administration. So you'd rather the failed status quo over Trump. That's a cliche, Homo. Do you know what it means? Try telling us what you mean by status quo - and what you mean by failed. Same old same old dear.  ::) Failed leftist socialist treacherous governments. Like the last Labor Party or Merkal's government. The same ones who look after any minority rather  than the white majority. I see. So what are Hillary's policies, Homo? I've just addressed some of Trump's. What does Hillary say she'll do? I've asked Herbie and Sprint, but they didn't answer. Do you know? She's about to fill America up with loads of Syrian refuges who will never integrate and will produce terrorists. She will not fix America's southern border which is responsible for a load of their crime. Nothing will get fixed. It's the same thing they have now. deterioration. No, Homo, tell us her economic and criminal policies. Cheers.

I'm only interested in her social policies. She's a globalist do-gooder dear.

Mr Hammer wrote on Oct 15^th, 2016 at 7:32pm:

Karnal wrote on Oct 15th, 2016 at 7:29pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Oct 15th, 2016 at 7:10pm: Karnal wrote on Oct 15th, 2016 at 7:04pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Oct 15th, 2016 at 6:59pm: Karnal wrote on Oct 15th, 2016 at 6:54pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Oct 15th, 2016 at 6:51pm: Karnal wrote on Oct 15th, 2016 at 6:47pm: Hillary won't either, Homo. I doubt anyone will. The US is slowly declining. Believe it or not though, the most prosperous period for the US in living memory was during Bill Clinton's "it's the economy, stupid" administration. So you'd rather the failed status quo over Trump. That's a cliche, Homo. Do you know what it means? Try telling us what you mean by status quo - and what you mean by failed. Same old same old dear.  ::) Failed leftist socialist treacherous governments. Like the last Labor Party or Merkal's government. The same ones who look after any minority rather  than the white majority. I see. So what are Hillary's policies, Homo? I've just addressed some of Trump's. What does Hillary say she'll do? I've asked Herbie and Sprint, but they didn't answer. Do you know? She's about to fill America up with loads of Syrian refuges who will never integrate and will produce terrorists. She will not fix America's southern border which is responsible for a load of their crime. Nothing will get fixed. It's the same thing they have now. deterioration. No, Homo, tell us her economic and criminal policies. Cheers. I'm only interested in her social policies. She's a globalist do-gooder dear.

You're not interested?

So why did you just ask me how Hillary will fix the situation?

Oh look, you've gone.

Here's what Wikipedia has to say on Hillary's economic policy.


Quote:

Economic policy[edit]According to Vox, Clinton was more liberal on economic issues than President Barack Obama and former President Bill Clinton, and had a more liberal voting record than Obama when they both served in the United States Senate.[20] According to a report by Moody's Analytics on Clinton's 2016 economic proposals, "Secretary Clinton's economic policies when taken together will result in a stronger U.S. economy under almost any scenario."[21] Clinton's proposals would, if enacted, create 10.4 million jobs during a four-year presidential term (3.2 million more than expected under current law).[21] GDP growth would be 2.7%, as opposed to the 2.3% expected under current law.[21] The report noted that her immigration proposal would increase the number of skilled workers in the economy, her infrastructure spending would help business productivity, and her paid family leave proposal would bring more people into the workforce.[21][22] According to a Financial Times survey of economists, roughly 70% of the economists polled between July 28–29 said a Clinton victory in November would be positive for U.S. economic growth (compared with just under 14% for Trump).[23] According to a survey of National Association for Business Economics (NABE) members, 55% of business economists feel that Clinton would do the best job as president of managing the U.S. economy (with 15% choosing Gary Johnson, 15% saying that they did not know or did not have an opinion, and 14% choosing Donald Trump).[24] According to a survey by the Wall Street Journal, 13 of the 20 former Democratic members of the White House Council of Economic Advisers openly support Clinton, and none of the 20 oppose her.[25] Clinton's "infrastructure plan has been widely praised by economists across the political spectrum."[26] However, John H. Cochrane, an economist at the conservative Hoover Institution, argues that Clinton's infrastructure spending plan would have limited effects on economic growth.[27] He has also said that "a President Trump 'could be responsible for more lost jobs than anyone.'"[28] The 2016 Clinton campaign's in-house economic advisors include Michael Shapiro and Michael Schmidt, who worked on economic policy in the Obama administration at the National Economic Council and Treasury Department, respectively.[29][30] The campaign's external advisory group includes Princeton professor Alan Krueger, former Treasury official and former chairperson of the U.S. Council of Economic Advisers; Princeton professor Alan Blinder, a member of the Council of Economic Advisers and a Federal Reserve official in the 1990s; liberal Columbia professor Joseph Stiglitz, a Nobel laureate, former World Bank chief economist and chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers, and prominent critic of free-market fundamentalism and the management of globalization; MIT professor Simon Johnson, a former chief economist of the IMF; Duke professor Aaron Chatterji; Berkeley professor Christina Romer, a former chair of the Council of Economic Advisers in the Obama administration; and Heather Boushey, an expert on inequality and paid family leave who serves as the executive director and chief economist of the Washington Center for Equitable Growth.[30][31][32][33]

I won't go into the tax and financial reforms. Suffice to say, another GFC could happen right now if Hillary doesn't do something about the sub-prime market, which has reared its ugly head again.

Obama's had no luck with the Republican congress, so there went that idea. Now they look like they'll lose that majority because of Trump, so Hillary may have a golden opportunity to regulate the banks.

Will she? Who knows? It's just her policy. What's Trump's?

Here's Wikipedia again.


Quote:

Trump's signature economic policies are the raising of tariffs, across-the-board tax cuts, the dismantling of the Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, the repeal of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act ("Obamacare"), and opposition to changing entitlement programs such as Social Security and Medicare.

So what do the agencies have to say? Moody's were surprisingly benign to Hillary."Secretary Clinton's economic policies when taken together will result in a stronger U.S. economy under almost any scenario."

On Trump?


Quote:

According to a report by Moody's Analytics, released in June 2016, the implementation of Trump's stated economic policies would make the U.S. economy "significantly weaker" According to a September 2016 report by the independent and non-partisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, Trump's economic policies would increase the national debt by $5.3 trillion.[50]

Read that again. Trump's economic policies alone will raise the US deficit by $5.3 trillion.

What were you saying about deterioration?

Now crime. Note the reform to mandatory sentencing and mass incarceration.

Good luck with that, Hillary. Obama hasn't had a fair go.


Quote:

Crime[edit]Clinton summarizes her key proposals on criminal justice reform as follows:[430] "End the era of mass incarceration, reform mandatory minimum sentences, and end private prisons." "Encourage the use of smart strategies — like police body cameras — and end racial profiling to rebuild trust between law enforcement and communities." "Help formerly incarcerated individuals successfully re-enter society." According to PolitiFact, Clinton "focuses more on what happens before prison (such as sentencing of people not currently incarcerated) and after prison (especially reintegrating ex-convicts into society after they are released) than actually releasing current inmates."[430] As for releasing current inmates, Clinton focuses on nonviolent offenders.[76] In 2000, during a Senate debate in Manhattan, Clinton voiced her support for drug courts to address drug abuse problems when she stated, "We need more treatment [for drug addicts]. It is unfair to urge people to get rid of their addiction and not have the treatment facilities when people finally make up their minds to get treatment."[431] In 2001, Clinton co-sponsored legislation that would create more tracking and harsher sentences for hate crimes.[432] In a speech in April 2015, Clinton said that body-worn cameras for police should be "the norm everywhere."[433] During the same speech, she also urged an end to excessive prison sentences that burden black communities.[433] She said that reform of mandatory sentencing laws are "long overdue" and criticized the militarization of police.[432] In March 2016, when asked about the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 signed into law by Bill Clinton that she supported at the time, she said that "there were some aspects that worked well" including violence against women provisions, but she noted that other portions related to increasing incarceration "were a mistake."[434][435] In 1994, she referred to the bill as a "very well-thought-out crime bill that is both smart and tough,"[432] and voiced support for three strikes laws when she stated "We need more police, we need more and tougher prison sentences for repeat offenders. The three strikes and you're out for violent offenders has to be part of the plan."[436] According to the Marshall Project's reporting, Clinton's position on the 1994 crime bill started to shift in a 1998 column as she picked and chose "from the crime bill's legacy, emphasizing the gun-control measures, prevention programs for juveniles, and funding for more police officers, without mentioning the law's contributions to mass incarceration."[432]

Here's a subject close to our hearts, Homo. Drugs.

Drugs and drug laws are a state issue, so I'm not holding my breath. Still, at least Hillary has policies. Try asking Trump his.


Quote:

Drug policy[edit]During her 2016 presidential campaign, Clinton has proposed a $10 billion plan, much of which would be funded by the federal government, intended to treat addicts, increase emergency responders' access to a life-saving rescue drug targeting overdoses, and curb incarceration for nonviolent drug offenses.[439] Clinton supports diversion programs such as treatment-focused drug courts,[440] saying in 2007: "Non-violent offenders should not be serving hard time in our prisons. They need to be diverted from our prison system."[441] Sentencing disparities[edit]While in the Senate, Clinton has supported reducing the sentencing disparity that currently punishes crack cocaine crimes more harshly than powder cocaine crimes, and in 2015, Clinton called for eliminating the disparity, saying: "We're talking about two forms of the same drug. It makes no sense to continue treating them differently."[442][443] (A 1986 federal law created a 100:1 power-crack disparity; the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 reduced this to an 18:1 disparity).[442][443] While campaigning in 2007, Clinton did not support making the elimination of the sentencing disparity retroactive, but in 2015 she expressed support for making change retroactively as well as prospectively.[442] Marijuana[edit]Clinton supports rescheduling marijuana, legalizing medical marijuana, and the right of states to legalize recreational marijuana. She has called for greater research on the subject. Her views on marijuana were described in 2015 as similar to the "cautious, leave-it-to-the-states strategy" of the Obama administration.[444] In May 2007, Clinton suggested the federal government was being "excessive" in its approach to patients who used medical marijuana. The following month, while campaigning in New Hampshire, Clinton has said she would end federal raids against such patients in states where the use of marijuana for medical purposes is legal.[445] In June 2014, Clinton said that on medical marijuana, "I don't think we've done enough research yet. Although I think for people who are in extreme medical conditions and have anecdotal evidence that it works, there should be availability under appropriate circumstances. But I do think we need more research, because we don't know how it interacts with other drugs."[444] On recreational marijuana, which has been legalized in Colorado and a few other states, Clinton said: "states are the laboratories of democracy. We have at least two states that are experimenting with that right now. I want to wait and see what the evidence is."[444] In April 2016, Clinton stated that she favored the removal of marijuana from Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act, which would make scientific studies of the substance significantly easier.[446] Clinton also stated: "We have enough anecdotal evidence ... about what marijuana can do for medical conditions, easing pain. And we need to be doing research on it because I am 100 percent in favor of medical uses for marijuana. But I want to know what the evidence is."[446] In her 2016 policy position on marijuana, Clinton says that she supports rescheduling marijuana to Schedule II; "allowing states that have enacted marijuana laws to act as laboratories of democracy, as long as they adhere to certain federal priorities such as not selling to minors, preventing intoxicated driving, and keeping organized crime out of the industry"; and "focus[ing] federal enforcement resources on violent crime, not simple marijuana possession."[447] Opioid crisis[edit]While campaigning for the presidency, Clinton has hosted forums on the opioid addiction crisis in the United States,[448] listing it as a top concern.[449] Clinton has pledged to make substance-abuse treatment, including medication-assisted treatment, available to more addicts.[449][450] Clinton also has pledged to make naloxone (Narcan), an antidote to opioid overdose, available to all police departments.[449]

Alright, we'll ask Trump his.


Quote:

Trump's views on drug policy have shifted dramatically over time.[417] At a luncheon hosted by the Miami Herald in April 1990, Trump told a crowd of 700 people that U.S. drug enforcement policy was a "a joke," and that: "We're losing badly the war on drugs. You have to legalize drugs to win that war. You have to take the profit away from these drug czars."[418][419] In his campaign for the presidency in 2015 and 2016, however, Trump adopted "drug warrior" positions[418] and has sought advice on the issue from William J. Bennett, who served as the U.S. first "drug czar" in the 1980s "and has remained a proponent of harsh 1980s-style drug war tactics."[420] Trump told Sean Hannity in June 2015 that he opposes marijuana legalization and that "I feel strongly about that."[418]

Good to see Trump feel strongly about something. What were you saying about the failed status quo again?

Let's ask Trump.

In 1990: "We're losing badly the war on drugs. You have to legalize drugs to win that war."

In 2015: He opposes marijuana legalization, wants to ramp up the war on drugs, and says,"I feel strongly about that".

Ever get the feeling you've been cheated?

http://ih1.redbubble.net/image.229667891.4741/raf,750x1000,075,t,f89f2b:1617e563f0.u1.jpg

Yes, that's right. Trump has a policy on Hillary. He plans to put her in jail.

Make Amerikan great again.

Ee-gad, where's Homo?

Karnal wrote on Oct 16^th, 2016 at 12:38pm:

Ee-gad, where's Homo?

Could relate to the problem with peace rates ? Those being paid on a per post basis may go quiet for a while.

Dnarever wrote on Oct 16^th, 2016 at 4:30pm:

Karnal wrote on Oct 16th, 2016 at 12:38pm: Ee-gad, where's Homo? Could relate to the problem with peace rates ? Those being paid on a per post basis may go quiet for a while.

I must admit, I couldn't afford Homo's salary.

Those trainees in aged care get Newstart benefits.

Beyond my humble means, Homo, sorry.

Cleveland Ohio - Trump speaks to crowded I-X centre


https://youtu.be/qKvWOqrYHqg

Discount the media and look at all those people!
http://blacksportsonline.com/home/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/Schilling-Trump-Rally-3.png

Quote:

...........Look at last night. He was in Cleveland. He had 10,000 people in Cleveland. You know, Hillary and -- and Tim Kaine, they were in Pennsylvania. They had 600 people in a gym...........

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/10/23/eric_trump_polls_are_wrong_you_cant_go_500_yards_without_seeing_a_trump_sign.html

marla,
I assume that was not at a trump rally.
Just some guy setting up his own support area.

I cant even see images of hillarys meetings.

Sprinty, has it ever occurred to you people go to Trump rallies much in the same way people stare at train wrecks?

Marla wrote on Oct 24^th, 2016 at 8:46am:

Sprinty, has it ever occurred to you people go to Trump rallies much in the same way people stare at train wrecks?

Maria - no.

People that stare at train wrecks do not wave signs saying "Go train" nor do they clap and cheer their approval.

She's running!