• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

The Official Paracast Political Thread!

Free episodes:

Status
Not open for further replies.
I wish this was a joke:

"While some Trump supporters took to Twitter with the hashtag #RepealThe19th - in reference to the 19th amendment of the US constitution which gave women the right to vote -"*

Strange days indeed :eek::mad::oops::confused::(


((source)) What if only goats voted in the US election? - BBC News

I read that as well and while it's tempting to put it off as another example of the alt right and perhaps it is I think it's meant to be more satirical or meant to make some of Trumps's followers seem more off kilter than they appear.

As you probably heard one of the earlier claims against Hillary is she wants to repeal the second amendment (which isn't even in the president's power) so maybe this is more of a matter of a group of people making a point.

At any rate 4 years from now I wonder if someone will have come out with the definitive book on the 1016 election and with all the subterfuge and emotional manipulation that was involved and if that does happen will this society have learned any lessons from it ?

Not on your life.
 
Actually, the REAL details from Wikileaks, when they are quoted accurately, do not reflect poorly on her. I know they made a real big deal of the Abraham Lincoln remark, but that's precisely what she said in those documents, that she thought of how he passed the 13th amendment, and what methods he used, based on the movie "Lincoln" as an inspiration. Indeed the relevant passages say just that.

If you want to know facts, rather than depend on all the Trump lies, read this long article dissembling the claims and the reality:

Fact check: Trump twists facts on WikiLeaks
 
From what I understand and have read (and maybe Mr. Basagio could elaborate on this) this type of politicking is not new and if we could transport ourselves back in time like Andy did we would probably cringe at some of the allegations and attacks that came out but at the same time given our present day numbers and the power of social media I wonder if in present day circumstances perhaps it's a more treacherous path for the populace .
 
Actually, the REAL details from Wikileaks, when they are quoted accurately, do not reflect poorly on her. I know they made a real big deal of the Abraham Lincoln remark, but that's precisely what she said in those documents, that she thought of how he passed the 13th amendment, and what methods he used, based on the movie "Lincoln" as an inspiration. Indeed the relevant passages say just that.

If you want to know facts, rather than depend on all the Trump lies, read this long article dissembling the claims and the reality:

Fact check: Trump twists facts on WikiLeaks

I'm not voting for Trump, just able to read what's in front of me and realize that Hillary is as dirty as they come and cannot fathom an awake human supporting her. The article you linked was just debunking things Trump said. I don't care to defend Trump and I'm sure there will be more dirt to come out on him as well.

Why would I trust USA Today or any mainstream media at this point anyway? The Podesta emails have numerous instances plainly showing media collusion with the Clinton campaign. Here's a media guestlist attending an event to get geared up for Clinton to announce her run. Here's one of the Brazile lady, who was working at CNN at the time, giving the Clinton campaign a head's up on one of the questions for the upcoming DNC town hall. Here's one where a guy from the New York Times tells them that they can veto whatever they want from a Hillary interview piece they're doing. There's plenty more of them in there, but those are the ones I can recall off the top of my head from following this stuff.

A quote on the deleted emails we hear about all the time, stating how Hillary herself was the one who deleted them: "While we all know of the occasional use of personal email addresses for business, none of my friends circle can understand how it was viewed as ok/secure/appropriate to use a private server for secure documents AND why further Hillary took it upon herself to review them and delete documents without providing anyone outside her circle a chance to weigh in. It smacks of acting above the law and it smacks of the type of thing I've either gotten discovery sanctions for, fired people for, etc."

Another great one, written by Hillary herself, where she flat out states "...the governments of Qatar and Saudi Arabia, which are providing clandestine financial and logistic support to ISIL and other radical Sunni groups in the region...". She's aware that these countries are funding and supporting the main terrorist enemy, but is ok with her foundation being handed millions of dollars by both. One of the newly leaked emails even mentions a $1 million birthday gift given to Bill from Qatar in the past. Or go look up her donors from their own materials if you think this is fabricated.

A Super PAC coordinating with Clinton campaign which is supposed to be illegal taken from an attachment in this email (I think). I'm sure most top politicians do this, but still.

This ain't illegal, but still a bad look to come out, with Hillary's campaign manager stating "I know she has begun to hate everyday Americans".

90% of these emails aren't even released yet, and the 10% that are out haven't even had much time to be scoured through and it already looks pretty awful.

Speaking of awful stuff, nevermind things from the past like the Clinton's role in fleecing Haiti after their country got demolished.

Or the way ol' Bernie never had a chance with the DNC working with the Clinton campaign.

Or if you have a conspiratorial leaning (obviously no hard evidence out for this, just lotta deaths that raise the eyebrows of some), all the alleged "Clinton body count" stuff that is out there
1476433275691.jpg


If you believe what you see on TV, I don't know what to say.

Edited to add:

With our crazy fast news cycle on spin-overdrive we've mostly forgotten about the "chance" meeting between Attorney General Lynch and Bill on the runway a week before the justice department decided to not move forward on Hillary. Come on now, that's so obvious.

Can't claim the wikileaks emails are fake either, otherwise how would a password found in Podesta's emails have been used to get into and post from his twitter account a day ago by some random internet troll?

Or all the business about "having a public opinion and a private opinion"? This is the sort of stuff most people have just gotten tired of, the double standards of high power politicians saying whatever they think the public wants to hear just to get elected and line the pockets of them and their friends.

Or how about the video of Obama on an airplane when he was running for Pres in which he flaunts his erection in front of female reporters? Imagine if a video came out of Trump doing that? All the aligned media would go ballistic. (If there's 1 Trump video there's gotta be more to come I'd think too).

Really all this stuff has been high drama. Far more entertaining than a TV show!

Edit:

Just wanted to add that it's been fascinating too, seeing how Podesta is down with the Greer-esque exopolitics stuff. Lotta emails in there about that topic, nothing at all that I've seen that indicates any evidence though. It's mostly just the exopolitics people emailing him on their usual talking points (zero point energy, disclosure, whatever).

Another edit now that I'm onto the topic lol, apologies for the long post...

This one that just came to light is pretty bad too, holy cow, related to the deleted email case and using the media to "distort" things via an asset at AP to put a story out with their desired spin.

And this one, talking about withholding emails that Obama was part of after their subpoena.
 
Last edited:
I wish this was a joke:

"While some Trump supporters took to Twitter with the hashtag #RepealThe19th - in reference to the 19th amendment of the US constitution which gave women the right to vote -"*

Strange days indeed :eek::mad::oops::confused::(


((source)) What if only goats voted in the US election? - BBC News

Han, this is clearly an opportunistic editorial and political commentary ala "fair and unbiased observation". It's certainly not a fact that the majority of Trump's supporters desire to deny women the right to vote. That's utter hogwash. I speak with highly educated professional women everyday that have generously confided their support for Trump. They just don't want the SOS. (same old $hit) This whole thing of lumping every Johnny Redneck that supports big Don into "this character assassination of a qualified summery" that equals the mindset of most Trump supporters is just liberal imagery propaganda. The BBC is FAR from being exempt from the typical American political centered click, or is it "clique" bate game playing. Remember, "views" are what news agencies monetarily thrive on. Don't take the bait my friend, this being despite your great love of angling. :) When it comes right down to it, after President Trump is elected this November, the world will find out that MR. Trump very much indeed has a real and sincere reverence for female/woman kind as a whole. Just sayin'
 
  • Like
Reactions: Han
It is a fair point about the BBC being untrustworthy (WMD's & 45 minutes)

Your analogy about fishing is a good one but the way I see it: what trump is doing is unsustainable, he is poisoning the water, and throwing in sticks of dynamite.

Obviously these are American elections, and the American people will decide the result, but countries like mine will be affected by the outcome. Some would argue that this would only be a "psychological" change, but really what else is more important?

I have great respect for the United States, and what I believe it stands for.

I don't have any good things to say about H Clinton except she is not trump.

Trump seems just like farage in his ability to act as a catalyst for bringing out the ugly side of false nationalism. They seem to give people license to be openly sexist, racist and a lot more.
I won't try to pretend things are not in a mess, or that politics feels like its working, but choosing trump would create an even worse situation for the truly helpless and voiceless.

I can see how a Trump victory could be perceived as a good thing, in that, something new and good could emerge from the chaotic maelstrom that would ensue, but I would prefer it if we could get there in a more civilised way.

In other words: if I was an American fish, I would want to avoid a shark like Hilary, but I certainly would sooner take my chances with her, than willingly throw myself into the trawl net of Trumps factory trawler, however much he promised me I would like it on board. The only thing he would deliver would be me in a tin to a supermarket at a knockdown price.

I don't for one second think that supporting trump automatically makes you anything, I can only base my views on trump v clinton with my personal reasons and the evidence I believe is relevant.
Lets just say I haven't heard trump say one thing which convinces me that he is not a part of the corporate fat cat elite, I fail to see how anybody could confuse trump with anything else?
 
It is a fair point about the BBC being untrustworthy (WMD's & 45 minutes)

Your analogy about fishing is a good one but the way I see it: what trump is doing is unsustainable, he is poisoning the water, and throwing in sticks of dynamite.

Obviously these are American elections, and the American people will decide the result, but countries like mine will be affected by the outcome. Some would argue that this would only be a "psychological" change, but really what else is more important?

I have great respect for the United States, and what I believe it stands for.

I don't have any good things to say about H Clinton except she is not trump.

Trump seems just like farage in his ability to act as a catalyst for bringing out the ugly side of false nationalism. They seem to give people license to be openly sexist, racist and a lot more.
I won't try to pretend things are not in a mess, or that politics feels like its working, but choosing trump would create an even worse situation for the truly helpless and voiceless.

I can see how a Trump victory could be perceived as a good thing, in that, something new and good could emerge from the chaotic maelstrom that would ensue, but I would prefer it if we could get there in a more civilised way.

In other words: if I was an American fish, I would want to avoid a shark like Hilary, but I certainly would sooner take my chances with her, than willingly throw myself into the trawl net of Trumps factory trawler, however much he promised me I would like it on board. The only thing he would deliver would be me in a tin to a supermarket at a knockdown price.

I don't for one second think that supporting trump automatically makes you anything, I can only base my views on trump v clinton with my personal reasons and the evidence I believe is relevant.
Lets just say I haven't heard trump say one thing which convinces me that he is not a part of the corporate fat cat elite, I fail to see how anybody could confuse trump with anything else?

Han,
I have always genuinely loved your reasonable and wisdom rich view points. For instance, and I know this is way off topic here, but your summery of Bigfoot four or five years ago, and the fact that the creature does in fact exist, if not definitively according to official key and typography, but rather in accord with his undeniable place in our social consciousness aside our own species' cognitive and sentient reflected definition, within the roll we ourselves play in the natural order of all things considered.

I tell you right now my friend, as surely as any two polarized positions play out their definitive respective opposing parts in this big picture that we all call reality, Trump is absolutely no different. Every definition we accept, every comparison we make, every fact that we all choose to file within our own cabinet of informational relevance, is first, a matter of subjective orientations with respect to this same living environment of consciousness. The only way any of us can mentally establish a sincere rigidity of survival insuring facts within this environment, is by first starting with a thorough familiarity with that environment's exterior most parameters, and then working our way back to center point where our existent self resides. These environmentally juxtaposed determinations that we all consider become what we accept as fact, and discard as what we have subjectively defined to be fiction.

The media is an extremely skilled hunter. The game it seeks cannot be solely reflected upon like specific taxidermied trophies found on some proud and bogus hunter's wall. This would give it's true game away. The media beast realizes that in order for it to survive, it's predaciously ravenous needs must be met by capitalizing on far greater sustenance that what individual take down provides. Rather it seeks to kill and devour great and truly potential numbers of it's target. It doesn't feed in legion, it feeds on legion, and it does so in a most effective manner. It satiates it's habitually glutenous appetite via a thorough understanding of this great and expansive environment of fundamental awareness that sums all of existence. As such it becomes an absolute master of what is an extremely appealing lure process, via the most skilled and exacting art of camouflage imaginable. It's methods are so efficient that nothing is wasted or left behind in the process of obtaining it's prey. Always using the environment of awareness to it's fullest advantage, it hunts at opportune times like high noon, dusk, or dawn. The light is key, and always serves the hunter's best interest. For bait, it uses undeniable, and extremely high profile key points of interest, to lure it's prey in mass to it's much advantaged kill center point. Once it's prey reaches ground zero, completely unbeknown, the beast has already, ever so subtly, arranged the immediate environment's stage at center point whereat the light serves it's deadly mission intent. Illuminating focal points that create feigned imagery by design, while using shadow to bolster the same, it convinces it's prey almost without effort that it is the bearer of that which informatively supports it's prey's pack survival instincts. The beast's powerful informational camouflage allows it to project precise relevant imagery input into the minds of it's prey via cognitive determinations that are made via progressive rational juxtapositions within the immediate center point environment of it's prey's conscious awareness. As it imitates the instinctive cuing of genuine cognitive process to it's deadliest of ends, it never wastes time attempting to convince it's prey of out and outright specifics. It realizes due to it's prey's pack nature, that would only once again give it's game away. The media beast is very shrewd and well aware that it's desired prey en masse are busy creatures of habit. It watches enraptured as it's unsuspecting prey dance away at center point within raised sparkling dust as it's illuminations play upon it's prey's own vane imaginings. We are already too busy chattering and squabbling away as we're slaughtered in great numbers, while caught up in trying to convince one another of our own illusory convictions and faux ideals that the beast skillfully inspired within each of us to begin with. It's ingenious! Allowing everyone within it's predacious process, other than itself, to do all the work for it. Once the initial center point lure/trap is set up, the media beast hides in plain sight waiting to devour it's prey, lazily salivating right there in their midst with few the wiser prior to demise. If it weren't so tragic, one would almost be inclined to describe the whole affair as graceful.

The human pack instinct of survival is an exceptionally powerful, scary, and ultra motivational force. Especially when it's skillfully manipulated to be used against all of us en masse by what is clearly a long standing Machiavellian design for hire. The media beast's official Latin key is Global fretus diaboli.

Please, exercise your greatest powers of observation and take prudent heed my friends. Time is short and I do not believe we will ever have another chance to defeat the beast that is the Global fretus diaboli.

 
Last edited:
Ben Carson; "Can you turn off her mic, please"

NO!

Ben Carson to host: Cut her mic off - CNN Video

Ben, it doesn't matter if those women are lying?

Of course it matters...and as I said where there's smoke...but note how Rebecca Berg that followed up this sequence phrased her response. instead of mentioning that they are allegations...and by the letter of the law they are...she suggests there's no evidence to dispute their accounts? Really ? Can you imagine this line of reasoning used in the court of law instead of the court of public opinion?


Edit: This was my tweet to her in the unlikely I get a response I'll post it here.

@rebeccagberg no EVIDENCE 2 suggest women R lying? Maybe that how it works in court public opinion, Journalism should B closer court of law.
 
Last edited:
Hi Jeff I just want to briefly reply now, because sometimes it takes me a while to hammer out a coherent portrayal of my feelings/thoughts, as I tend to think in pictures and stories.

I agree entirely about the way the media operates, it/they are rotten to the core, but I do not agree that they are the enemy, I believe that they are a reflection of us (society) they are in the business of selling newspapers (figure of speech) and will say anything to sell more, but that doesn't mean people have to buy.

Maybe I am too literal, and want to follow things back too far, but when I look at someone like trump, I am reminded of a fraudulent faith healer.

Placebo and Nocebo are real and you wont find a bigger advocate than me of complimentary medicine. (as in alongside conventional medicine)

To go further with my analogy I would describe what I have seen of trump, to the footage I have seen of a faith healer called "Peter Popoff".

What trump and popof do is the same, they use peoples very real problems as a way to separate them from their money or their vote.

Popofs' system worked by getting the people that needed healing to fill out a form detailing themselves and their ailment, trump uses social media to the same end, once armed with this information they pretend to be very insightful, when in reality all they are doing is being told what to say via an earpiece.

popof would go as far as to say throw away your pills, and trump is saying throw away: the best most advanced and fairest system yet devised (Democracy).

Democracy has its pitfalls and its original implementation was a far cry from what we expect today (something like 10% of the Athenian population were eligible to cast a vote) but in its modern form I find it preferable to any of the other alternatives. This may sound strange coming from someone that lives under a monarchy, but the reality is that the people have had the Monarchs ear (well his entire head at one point) for a long time. Somehow we managed to compromise and find a workable system. Yes it is unfair, but so is life.

The Human spirit is irrepressible and we will find joy and happiness regardless of the political situation, it is just a lot easier to do so when you are not constantly looking over your shoulder.

trump is no child playing with matches, he is well aware of the triangle of fire, and very adept at feeding the flames. It only takes a small spark to start a big fire.

I wouldn't burn my house down on the promise of a new better house magically appearing in its place.


I am going to post one "tweet" that for me highlights the madness of the current situation and the way that trumpism has emboldened people to say the most incendiary things, the reason that I have chosen a tweet is that it was #1 voluntarily posted #2 it is in its original form and not "spun" by the mainstream media.

tweet.png

Just as an aside I noticed that the mob in the picture was very diverse, and was clearly made by a professional artist. I was very interested to find out the origin of the picture and managed to find it via something called "tin eye" the artist is called John Lund and my understanding is that the Sheriff used the image without the proper permissions! (obviously not as serious as inciting violence but still ironic)


LOL.png

((source))

&

 
I would never presume to try and tell any American citizen who they should vote for, it's a matter for the U.S electorate alone. But I must say I am surprised with anyone in this thread who vocally backs either candidate - simply because all politicians can be proven to be liars basically. In the history of the whole world I doubt there have been many candidates for high office who are even remotely whiter than white (obviously not talking about race).
Politicians say things to get elected. They say things that they either do not believe personally, or things that they do not care about or have knowledge about. They will have one point of view supposedly set in stone, only to change their minds 180 degrees later on. They are beholden to financial backers and powerful lobbyists. Once elected, most of what they have promised etc just gets forgotten about because it was only ever said to get votes.
I've often said that anyone running for high office, and badly wanting high office, should be barred from such office on those grounds alone. They don't really care about the welfare of most people, they only pretend to when they have to. That goes for both 'sides'. It's the same in every country. I don't claim to have a satisfactory alternative and I am fully aware that the choice is often the lesser of two evils.

Either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump will be the nest President of the United States and Americans will have to make their choice come election time. Many would like a viable 3rd option, but people understandably worry that voting for such a candidate may inadvertently aid one of the other two.

I'm not having a go at either Trump supporters or Clinton supporters but what I am getting at, is the almost hero-worship of both by some. Supporters of one seem blind to the negative history of that candidate but hyper-aware of the failings of that candidates opponent. Similarly, people are very aware of the positive aspects to one candidate but resolutely blind to anything positive of the other. It isn't a case of one lot of people being right and the other lot being wrong.

I wonder if, just for the fun of it, anyone here who is vehemently pro-Trump or pro-Clinton, would care to list 5 positive comments about the candidate they do not intend voting for? Everyone one has good points and bad points and it is very easy to blinker one's self to seeing the good in only one Presidential hopeful but I'd be really interested to see if anyone would be willing to say positive things about the candidate they do not like?

Go on people, surprise me!:D
 
I would never presume to try and tell any American citizen who they should vote for, it's a matter for the U.S electorate alone. But I must say I am surprised with anyone in this thread who vocally backs either candidate - simply because all politicians can be proven to be liars basically. In the history of the whole world I doubt there have been many candidates for high office who are even remotely whiter than white (obviously not talking about race).
Politicians say things to get elected. They say things that they either do not believe personally, or things that they do not care about or have knowledge about. They will have one point of view supposedly set in stone, only to change their minds 180 degrees later on. They are beholden to financial backers and powerful lobbyists. Once elected, most of what they have promised etc just gets forgotten about because it was only ever said to get votes.
I've often said that anyone running for high office, and badly wanting high office, should be barred from such office on those grounds alone. They don't really care about the welfare of most people, they only pretend to when they have to. That goes for both 'sides'. It's the same in every country. I don't claim to have a satisfactory alternative and I am fully aware that the choice is often the lesser of two evils.

Either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump will be the nest President of the United States and Americans will have to make their choice come election time. Many would like a viable 3rd option, but people understandably worry that voting for such a candidate may inadvertently aid one of the other two.

I'm not having a go at either Trump supporters or Clinton supporters but what I am getting at, is the almost hero-worship of both by some. Supporters of one seem blind to the negative history of that candidate but hyper-aware of the failings of that candidates opponent. Similarly, people are very aware of the positive aspects to one candidate but resolutely blind to anything positive of the other. It isn't a case of one lot of people being right and the other lot being wrong.

I wonder if, just for the fun of it, anyone here who is vehemently pro-Trump or pro-Clinton, would care to list 5 positive comments about the candidate they do not intend voting for? Everyone one has good points and bad points and it is very easy to blinker one's self to seeing the good in only one Presidential hopeful but I'd be really interested to see if anyone would be willing to say positive things about the candidate they do not like?

Go on people, surprise me!:D


At least over there in Scotland you have the Highland Scots who, (if not mistaken), in the past have been notably loyal.

Over here in the US it’s somewhat of a crapshoot, as you may have noticed.
 
I would never presume to try and tell any American citizen who they should vote for, it's a matter for the U.S electorate alone. But I must say I am surprised with anyone in this thread who vocally backs either candidate - simply because all politicians can be proven to be liars basically. In the history of the whole world I doubt there have been many candidates for high office who are even remotely whiter than white (obviously not talking about race).
Politicians say things to get elected. They say things that they either do not believe personally, or things that they do not care about or have knowledge about. They will have one point of view supposedly set in stone, only to change their minds 180 degrees later on. They are beholden to financial backers and powerful lobbyists. Once elected, most of what they have promised etc just gets forgotten about because it was only ever said to get votes.
I've often said that anyone running for high office, and badly wanting high office, should be barred from such office on those grounds alone. They don't really care about the welfare of most people, they only pretend to when they have to. That goes for both 'sides'. It's the same in every country. I don't claim to have a satisfactory alternative and I am fully aware that the choice is often the lesser of two evils.

Either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump will be the nest President of the United States and Americans will have to make their choice come election time. Many would like a viable 3rd option, but people understandably worry that voting for such a candidate may inadvertently aid one of the other two.

I'm not having a go at either Trump supporters or Clinton supporters but what I am getting at, is the almost hero-worship of both by some. Supporters of one seem blind to the negative history of that candidate but hyper-aware of the failings of that candidates opponent. Similarly, people are very aware of the positive aspects to one candidate but resolutely blind to anything positive of the other. It isn't a case of one lot of people being right and the other lot being wrong.

I wonder if, just for the fun of it, anyone here who is vehemently pro-Trump or pro-Clinton, would care to list 5 positive comments about the candidate they do not intend voting for? Everyone one has good points and bad points and it is very easy to blinker one's self to seeing the good in only one Presidential hopeful but I'd be really interested to see if anyone would be willing to say positive things about the candidate they do not like?

Go on people, surprise me!:D
I find this election fascinating. By all rights, Trump should be buried in the dirt from all his nonsense and statements he has made. If you can believe the polls, he is still in the race. It leads me to believe one of a few things.

1. A large segment of the population dislike the Clintons, pure and simple. Don't think for a moment that if Hillary gets elected, Bill will be sitting mute on the sidelines.

2. Hillary Clinton is just a weak candidate. Enough said.

3. Clinton would be a continuation of Obama's policies. Most people are just tired of eight years of him. Another eight years of Obama 2... no thanks.

4. People want the system shaken up. The middle class has been screwed royally. Up until now, Trump wasn't a slick professional politician. You roll the dice and take a chance on a possible maniac.

It's probably a combination of all of the above.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Han
if I ran for president this would be my platform
14650073_10209049414844823_7620073818528602230_n.jpg

why cant we have leaders like this what happened to our nation?
 
in all seriousness. Any vote for anyone else would insure Donald Trump the win. there is a strong move to write in Bernie Sanders. We Must reject such. We can Ill afford to NOT vote for Hillary Clinton. Look we have a pompous buffoon a hairs breath away from being our president. we can not watch WE MUST ACT! Look put all our arguments aside. What will Kim Jung Un do with Trump in the white house? Or Putin? OR ISIS? we can not watch we must act! Look I KNOW Hillary is not perfect NONE of us are! BUT its comes down to a choice. Who do you trust? An inexperienced CLOWN with a temper? or a leader who has great support?
we can not watch we must act! I don't give a damn if anything I or my husband has said over the last few years has been heard but hear me now and believe! DONALD TRUMP MUST NOT BE PRESIDENT!
and like her or not the ONLY ONE who stands between him and the oval office is Clinton!
So please do as my husband did put away your misgivings for Hillary our nation needs strong leadership as shown in the Lincoln clip!
Hillary will lead us for a Better tomorrow!
Blessed be.
Victoria Watson
"Rikki"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top