Reply With Quote
Rump is turning down 10 million dollars to simply talk policy.
Obama suggests sexism could be hurting Clinton's White House bid
http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/18/politi...ser/index.html
Rump is turning down 10 million dollars to simply talk policy.
Mark Cuban is totally irrelevant to the election. Trump has zero incentive to debate him.
If Trump was proficient in any sort of public or foreign policy discussion his incentive should be to show his competence. But he's not. He would be completely embarrassed and has zero incentive to take up that challenge.
Should he debate anyone that challenges him? That's just dumb.
Of course not. my point was that, if he were competent in policy discussion, it would be an opportunity to showcase his ability. But he's not.
Do you think Hillary would debate an adversary on her foreign policy? Say...Hannity?....uhhhh no.
Does that mean she isn't competent to discuss foreign policy?
That doesnt make any sense. Hillary wouldnt do it, guaran ingtee you.
False equivalence. 1st off Cuban didn't offer a "debate", he said he would question Rump on his policies.
2ndly Cuban offered 10 mil of his own money. That scam artist Hannity doesn't have anywhere near 10 million, nor would he offer it if he did.
You say some of the dumbest things.
Sean Hannity is an American author, radio and television host and also a commentator. He has a net worth of $80 million. He was born on 30th December, 1961. He is famous as the host of the radio talk show “The Sean Hannity Show” that airs on Premiere Radio Networks.
Philly FOP Chief On Presidential Endorsement: Clinton ‘Blew The Police Off’
http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/201...he-police-off/
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/0...-donors-228338
trump shatters record with small donors!
I didn't say she would. I was simply making the point that it would allow him to establish himself as competent and able to discuss foreign and public policy.
My mistake about Scamitty having 10 million. I had no idea that were that many sheep to be sheared by the Repug Re .
Not a mistake about his willingness to share it.
http://www.debbieschlussel.com/6938/...s-for-vannity/
Sean Hannity’s Freedom CONcert Scam: Almost None of Charity’s $ Went to Injured Troops, Kids of Fallen Troops; G5s for Vannity?
No way Trump is winning 20% of the black vote. How you jump from 1% to 20% in a two week span? That makes zero sense. They must be polling 2500 recipients in a GOP friendly county.
It's like I said. Hillary has had over a month of bad press, a health scare and a huge gaffe and Trump still can't scratch over 40% in the pollsHe's a loser that the majority doesn't want as President. When Hillary loses support it goes to the third party candidates or people who are undecided, not to Trump. Hillary is running a campaign and keeping him in the game and she's hoping the Obamas, Bernie, and Biden can save her sorry ass come November.
She ran a much better campaign against Obama. Not sure what she is doing this time around.
Bill Clinton to NPR: 'Maybe' Some Money Used to Influence State Dept.
http://www.npr.org/2016/09/19/494514...paign=politics
Clinton calls for 'tough vetting of immigrants and better visa system'
That's ing hilarious. She is ting the bed.
http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000552185
Sounds more rational to me than banning all Muslims (or at least trying to).
Clinton calls for 'tough vetting of immigrants and better visa system'
That's ing hilarious. She is ting the bed.
http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000552185
a true muslim does not agree with the usa laws and their object is to convert people
study it you will find out
Even if that's so, banning them all from entering the USA is not a serious policy proposal and it doesn't address the ones who are already here and may be radicalized.
It's been done before. How many German or Japanese immigrants did the US let in during WWII? Is the US fighting a war against muslim terrorists or isn't it? If it isn't, then get the out of the middle east. If it is than ban them.
Typical. The statement was stopping them until we had a better vetting system.
Naturally you left that part out.
"Hillary has the potential to do a whole lot more damage, get us into more wars, faster to pass her fracking disastrous climate program, much more easily than Donald Trump could do his."
stein
Those are not examples of it having been done before. Those are not examples of banning people based on their religion. Religion is not the same as race. It's something people can change, lie about, etc. Totally different.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
