It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
=))
http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/
A slew of lesser known speakers now; another hour or so before we get the more heavyweight speakers, however you want to term that. Anyway, you can follow it all here ... http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/07/28/us/elections/dnc-speakers.html
@CASINOROYALE
Wrong on those facts.
1. Regarding Chelsea: No. She did not send classified info to her: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/01/08/with-2-a-m-state-department-email-trove-82-percent-of-clinton-emails-now-released/
2. Regarding the You Tube video: State and the Obama administration worked off what turned out to be conflicting intel. That said, HRC herself NEVER said the attacks were simply caused by a video. She had framed it within context. (Shall we look at the ignored intel that the Bush administration had in its hands regarding 9/11 attacks?)
3. No evidence, in any of her emails, in any of the info gathered across all of the investigations, that HRC and Obama ever denied "extra security." https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2015/10/21/fact-checking-the-benghazi-attacks-2/
Regardless, neither of the false allegations in #2 and #3 (even if proven true) is an offense worthy of prison time.
Here is the problem with conservatives, and it has been the problem for decades. You start with the conclusion (in this case, that Hillary Clinton is a shameful, lying, conniving, corrupt B) and then work backwards to gather (and even manufacture) evidence to support the conclusion that you so desperately need to be true. It happens again and again. This is due to the conservative mindset, which is based on beliefs and not truths. Every aspect of right-wing ideology comes from theological, economic, and social theories that they think are "truths" and can't tolerate it when those precious theories are proven by science, human progress, and just about everything else to be flat-out wrong. Bottom line is, the truths conservatives "believe" are nothing more than fabricated constructs.
But back to Benghazi and "facts," because you might either A) Not remember; B) Have conveniently forgotten; and C) might just be too young and naive to know. Read the below article about the 1983 attack on the Beirut embassy that left 241 men dead. 241. Not 4. 241. And then research how many hearings the Democrats held thereafter. Were the Democrats smarter? Or just acting like adults? Or both? You tell me.
http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/ronald-reagans-benghazi
Gosh, @chrisisall, where DID you find that rude, rude pundit? =))
Anyway, all I take away from this is that the democrats are more positive, have far better speach writers, and at least seem to care about their fellow countrymen. I found it heartwarming that both Obama and Clinton thanked Sanders.
I can understand people not caring for Clinton, but I can't understand that would lead to a vote for Trump. As I said before, the risks are too great.
Oh, and by the way, America isn't the greatest country in the world, living in any of the scandinavian countries is far better >:)
And somehow, nobody's looking to the Scandinavian countries to carry the lead in the fight against terrorism... ;)
So why isn't anybody expecting China to destroy Islamic Terrorism? :-/
Beats me. They're probably too busy selling the Americans beats and mirrors... eh... I mean plastic toys.
My expectations were higher, given the star political talent available to them, it was very glitzy and much more professionally polished than the opposition, which was as expected. She will get a convention bounce out of this, and will go into a slight lead in a week imho.
Where it fell flat for me was in explaining a clear vision for the country in clarified terms. Where they did express a vision, it was mainly in contrast to, and fear of Trump, as opposed to something that stood alone. So even though there was an attempt to portray the candidate as a 'change maker', the change that was being proposed in all the speeches was essentially a 'please do not elect that 'f' Trump' vision as far as I could tell - at least in terms of 'messaging'.
Moreover, nearly all the speakers of note were more interesting / charismatic and dynamic than the eventual nominee, who was overshadowed by her myriad supporters, despite the historic nature of her 'first woman' candidacy. The only other time I've felt this in my memory was with Palin in '08 (who overshadowed McCain), Obama in '04 (who stole the entire Convention from the nominee) and Clinton in '00 (who upstaged Gore). This is again, in stark contrast to the Republican convention, where the entire side show built up to the main event by the man himself.
I still believe this will all come down to the debates (most probably that first one), and who does a better job of it. Trump benefits from very low expectations (which he himself is feeding), so he has an advantage in my opinion.
So when she rips Trump for being negative about the direction the nation is going in, I don't really hear anything more positive coming from her (again in terms of overall messaging). In that respect, she is indirectly feeding the perception that she is 'status quo', even though they are denying it.
Again, regarding those debates - the Dem's have built this up that Trump is going to fall flat on his face. That's what he wants I think. They've played into that narrative. Now he has to blow her out of the water. Whether he can or not is a big question (I rate his chances at 40/60 because he is so unpredictable). If he does, I think this election will be over on that night.
PS: I really believe they've made a mistake by making this about Trump. He is just a messenger for a portion of the electorate (just like Bernie was). For a mood in the country. They had to address and answer that mood, and this is where I don't think they succeeded this week.
I have to question if you're actually listening to what Hillary was saying, or just "automatically gainsaying the other's position." Hillary had a whole laundry list of positive things she wants to do. Whether or not she can accomplish them depends a whole lot on how cooperative the Republicans are going to feel when Madame President comes knocking...
I don't think the messaging was clear enough out of the Dem's convention. It was very clear out of the Repub's convention (whatever you may think of that message).
Yes, ultimately, Hillary's success will depend on how well she works with the other side. She has been more successful in her roles than when she is campaigning (as she correctly noted during her Charlie Rose interview). She does indeed work well with the Repubs when in a 'junior' role. Will they accept and work with her as president though, or will they go out of their way to demonize her?
I predicted this a year ago and a lot of people didn't beleive me cause of all her scandals but no matter what you want to happen Hillary will be the next president of USA.
— Gov. Mike Pence, in an interview with Hugh Hewitt, objecting to President Obama calling Donald Trump a “demagogue.”
I wonder how he feels about all the folks calling Trump "Traitor"?
"Lying" and "Crooked" and so forth are all fair game, of course...
In it. ( From both sides )
I'm fairly certain that Pence does feel that such things don't have a place in politics, as I've heard him make the claim before. His problem, though, is that he's sold out in order to save his political career. He was going to have a difficult time winning re-election in Indiana, so he jumped ship in the hope that Trump could save his political career after countless others turned down Trump's VP offers. The Trump/Pence combo really is a marriage of desperation, for both of them.
Best speech of the whole darn convention season. Fox News cut away from it, of course...
Hey, all the rules have been thrown out the window. It's Trump's World now. Shut up and he'll maybe let you live in it.
I wonder why you assume the world expects the US to "lead in the fight against terrorism"? On the contrary we pray every day that you will not yet again do something stupid that just messes up everything...
We are World Police! tm
And whaddya mean "mess up everything?" We offer the world ORDER!! Just, y'know, in a sort of chaotic & self-serving way...
:-\"