US Politics Mega-thread - Page 4791

On August 22 2016 05:27 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
Even if you prefer Hillary and think she's better in every other way than Trump, you can't defend her on the press conference issue. It's one where Trump is objectively better than her.

It's like the tax release issue. A Trump supporter might argue it isn't a huge deal that Trump doesn't release his taxes, but they still have to concede that Hillary doing so while he doesn't can be anything other than a positive point for Hillary over Trump.

I think to suggest otherwise on either issue is just childish. If you're incapable of giving due credit to someone just because you loathe them, or rightly criticizing someone just because you support them, then you're just being stupid

On August 22 2016 05:26 puerk wrote:


Your understanding of the forces leading to reunification are so obnoxiously bad it hurts.
I am from Leipzig. I was born in the GDR, my parents protested in 1989 and were part of church organized groups, and understandably afraid, that there would be repeats of 1953, 68 or Tian'anmen.

The reunification happened because of the bravery of demonstrating people in the streets, the sowjet decision not to send tanks again as they did before, and the decision of the outnumbered police and secret police to not slaughter the 70000 people protesting peacefully on the 9.10.1989.

Reagan had no influence on those people. None at all. The people in power and responsible that it didn't turn into a bloodbath, looked to the east for guidance, not across the ocean. The Kremlin not sending troops, and not ordering a violent crackdown on protests, was vital, but it was inaction that allowed local action to succeed not action inspired by reagan or what ever you imagine in your purposefully ridiculous version of history you wrote.

Maybe this helps you understand: http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/09/lets-please-stop-crediting-ronald-reagan-for-the-fall-of-the-berlin-wall/262647/

but i doubt it judging your post history.

We owe deep gratitude to President Bush, Secretary of State Baker and the US negotiating team headed by Robert Zoellick. Without their commitment and determination German unification would not have been brought about. The “Treaty on the Final Settlement with respect to Germany” has stood the test of time.

Dieter Kastrup, Director General for Political Affairs, West Germany, 1988-1990

We beat the Germans twice, and now they're back.

WASHINGTON - Donald Trump's campaign expenses more than doubled last month, even as the Republican presidential nominee held his payroll to about 70 employees, aired zero television advertisements and undertook no significant operational buildout across the country.

Instead, about half of the campaign's $18.5 million in spending was vacuumed up by Giles-Parscale, a web design and marketing firm new to national politics, Federal Election Commission filings show. It's a crossover vendor from Trump's real estate organization.

The campaign paid Giles-Parscale $8.4 million in July, about twice what the San Antonio firm had collected from it over the course of the preceding year. Brad Parscale, the president, is the campaign's director of digital marketing.

The big expense came as Trump put a new emphasis on online fundraising, after paying for his primary run mostly out of his own pocket.

Millions more went to air travel. The campaign paid about $2 million for private jets other than Trump's own TAG Air, which also collected $500,000.

Some of Trump's consultants are also mysteriously well-paid.

Chess Bedsole, the campaign's Alabama state director, was paid $64,000 last month for field consulting. His last campaign payment was for $15,000 in December.

Yet the campaign's payroll remained thin, and there did not appear to be much new in the way of office leases across the country, including in critical battleground states such as Ohio.

Trump has relied heavily on the Republican National Committee for conventional campaign infrastructure. And he's boasted of holding the line on his campaign spending. But he's running critically low on time to build an operation that can compete with Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton.

On August 22 2016 06:33 oBlade wrote:

You said in a one-liner something to the effect of Gorbachev reunified the country and I was mocking you. You now thought that I was the one representing the literal claim that everything good in the world is directly owed to Ronald Reagan? He wasn't even president. The things you are describing are not historical accidents that just happened to result in a smooth reunification. Gorbachev didn't set out to gift-wrap East Germany to NATO and do everything in his power to weaken the Soviet sphere. Yes, it started with the people. But that isn't the whole story or you're doing a disservice to everyone who protests in the name of democracy and self-determination and fails to get it. Like the Czechs under the USSR. The protests and mass migration were an opportunity seized by the Bush administration.

On August 22 2016 06:43 KwarK wrote:
Reunification was opposed by many in western Europe as I recall on the grounds that a united Germany would inevitably take its rightful place as a European superpower, eclipsing Britain and France and reigniting the conflict that had been raging since 1870. Thatcher was outspoken on the matter for example remarking that

and Mitterrand agreed. Not that I blame them, I have thirty years of peaceful European hindsight to approve of reunification from whereas from their historical perspective the stability and peace in Europe was contingent on Germany not having the strength to challenge France or Britain.

The Americans are doing us all a favour with the continued occupation of Germany, although the EU has given Germany a less violent means to express her economic, demographic and political primacy within Europe. The unified German state (well, almost unified, Austria is still outside) will always represent a threat to peace in Europe and exists only because it was not politically feasible for the other national leaders to prevent it. Continued US occupation and military, economic and political integration through NATO and the EU respectively were the best compromise that could be made to assuage the fears of the Anglo-French axis.

On August 22 2016 10:09 pmh wrote:



The unified German state (well, almost unified, Austria is still outside) will always represent a threat to peace in Europe and exists only because it was not politically feasible for the other national leaders to prevent it. Continued US occupation and military, economic and political integration through NATO and the EU respectively were the best compromise that could be made to assuage the fears of the Anglo-French axis

This cant be serious. Not a single person in Europe is afraid of Germany and its power. They are afraid economically but no one thinks it is a threat to peace.

Anyway:whats up with Hillary hiding and dodging. She has to give a press conference at some point,even more when president.

On August 22 2016 05:42 JinDesu wrote:
To me, I always thought press conferences were intended to either:

1) Provide clarification or justification on a recent event the person presenting was involved in.
2) Provide a platform to introduce or celebrate a new item/topic/platform of the person presenting.
3) Provide a platform to denounce something that the person presenting is against.

I don't see how it is a necessary item for Hillary if she has been answering reporter questions, been in interviews, been present to questioning before congress and on TV several times, etc. Press conferences were always to me a "HEY LOOK AT ME" thing if it wasn't actually related to a current pressing event.

Did the Chemtrail Flu Kill Prince and Merle Haggard?

On August 22 2016 10:45 KwarK wrote:
Infowars isn't a news website, it's a conspiracy theory website. See
www.infowars.com/did-the-chemtrail-flu-kill-prince-and-merle-haggard/

Apparently the answer is yes because the New World Order needed to silence him.

On August 22 2016 10:48 GoTuNk! wrote:


So Dr. Drew's claims are totally false and Hillary's Health is perfect?

On August 22 2016 11:05 xDaunt wrote:
It doesn't take a genius to see that Hillary has health problems. She very clearly has suffered from some sort of cognitive disorder, though we can only speculate as to its nature and severity.

On August 22 2016 10:48 GoTuNk! wrote:


So Dr. Drew's claims are totally false and Hillary's Health is perfect?