Dog food

[joeb]

I heard a really good political  analogy today from a local talk show host.  He told the story of a large dog food company that really needed to increase their sales so they went to a major advertising agency and had them create an advertising campaign for them.  They spent millions on this campaign.  But, six months went by and still their sales hadn't increased so they went to the advertising agency and asked what the problem was because the advertising agency had told them this was a sure-fire thing.  Well, the agency hemmed and hawed a little and then finally told the dog food company the truth: the dogs wouldn't eat their product because they didn't like it. 

Hillary Clinton has already spent more than $100 million on ad buys against Trump but she is still slowly sinking in the polls.  I can tell her what the problem is: the "deplorables", which in her mind is anyone who doesn't like socialism, hate her politics and her message, and over and above that they hate being lied to.....  This is what happens to politicians who destroy their own credibility.  She has the media, political structure, and intelligentsia in her pocket and she is still failing....

Billary is the worst thing that could happen to this country.  Anyone whose word is worthless can't be trusted in anything. 

[bonnie]

23 minutes ago, joeb said:

 

Billary is the worst thing that could happen to this country.  Anyone whose word is worthless can't be trusted in anything. 

We have Obama's word on that. He has said Hillary Clinton cannot be trusted and that she will say anything.

[bonnie]

It gets more and more interesting. Hillary Clinton cancelled a mega fundraiser . If her health is a real issue who would they replace her with? Bernie or Goofy Joe Biden?

[CoAspen]

So...you are content with pilloring HC, who do you suggest is the better, since this is only a two party race?

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

I thought Gary Johnson was going to be on all the ballots, as well as Clinton and Trump.

[JoeMo]

14 minutes ago, rudywoofs (Pam) said:

I thought Gary Johnson was going to be on all the ballots, as well as Clinton and Trump.

I think he is.  By a 2-party race, maybe CoA is assuming Gary Johnson doesn't stand a snowball's chance in purgatory of effectively competing with HC or DT.  If HC drops out of the race (or is dropped from the race), my guess is that jumpin' Joe Biden will replace her.

I wonder how many people who are being polled pick HC or DT because those are the only choices they are given?  I wouldn't be surprised if, when people actually cast their votes, they won't be able to decide if HC or DT is the lesser of two weevils; and vote for Johnson as a "protest" vote.

[CoAspen]

I don't know if he(Johnson) is on all ballots. What ever the vote for him, it will be single digit, most likely, if true to form for third parties. But is it really a 'protest' vote? Is it a help to the country to 'waste' a vote and let whatever happens, happen? Do people want to just sit back and complain, say "I told you so", or become 'sideliners'. We have the freedom to vote, many have given their lives for those and other rights, do we waste the freedom? 3rd parties are not viable in this country and show no data for anyone to think they are going to be in this election.

The alternative would be to carefully study what the two candidates are saying, have said, have accomplished and avoid all the pundits, blog magazines, etc, then make a decision. A careful study of history will show that the past is quite replete with flawed individuals, some more so than others. There is no perfect or well...just a few faults, or...well, not too bad od a candidate. They are all human. Come on people, don't just listen to the politicol rhetoric, mud slinging, name calling and all the other garbage being tossed about, there is still time to study and learn for your self. Make a choice that will actually count in who becomes the next president.

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

It's a no-brainer as to how my State will vote.  Until the electoral college is booted out and everyone's vote actually counts,  how I vote really doesn't make any difference in the presidential election votes from my State.. 

If I don't think either the Dem or Rep candidates on the ballot are worth voting for (which is what I think), and if my vote doesn't matter (which it doesn't), then I'll probably do a protest vote.

[bonnie]

1 hour ago, CoAspen said:

I don't know if he(Johnson) is on all ballots. What ever the vote for him, it will be single digit, most likely, if true to form for third parties. But is it really a 'protest' vote? Is it a help to the country to 'waste' a vote and let whatever happens, happen? Do people want to just sit back and complain, say "I told you so", or become 'sideliners'. We have the freedom to vote, many have given their lives for those and other rights, do we waste the freedom? 3rd parties are not viable in this country and show no data for anyone to think they are going to be in this election.

The alternative would be to carefully study what the two candidates are saying, have said, have accomplished and avoid all the pundits, blog magazines, etc, then make a decision. A careful study of history will show that the past is quite replete with flawed individuals, some more so than others. There is no perfect or well...just a few faults, or...well, not too bad od a candidate. They are all human. Come on people, don't just listen to the politicol rhetoric, mud slinging, name calling and all the other garbage being tossed about, there is still time to study and learn for your self. Make a choice that will actually count in who becomes the next president.

Are you of the opinion that those that oppose Hillary Clinton have not carefully studied not only what she is saying but her actions over the years since she has been prominent in politics?

 Many of those that support or are holding their nose long enough to vote Trump have carefully looked at both

and have decided that Hillary is not the one they can support in any form or fashion. Same as you seem to have decided you cannot support Trump in any form or fashion.

[bonnie]

10 minutes ago, rudywoofs (Pam) said:

It's a no-brainer as to how my State will vote.  Until the electoral college is booted out and everyone's vote actually counts,  how I vote really doesn't make any difference in the presidential election votes from my State.. 

If I don't think either the Dem or Rep candidates on the ballot are worth voting for (which is what I think), and if my vote doesn't matter (which it doesn't), then I'll probably do a protest vote.

The same has always been true of MN until Jessie the clown came along. Will be interesting this year.

More and more shopping or going into any place of business I am surprised at the comments concerning a Hillary win. Unlike previous years businesses usually refrain from conversations concerning their choice.Not so this year. MN is a liberal democratic state,yet I have heard only one that declared belief in her honesty and integrity.

[bonnie]

It is tough to find a prominent Clinton supporter or  that is connected to her financially that is not under suspicion or being investigated for fraud of some sort.  David Brock who is offering payment for anything to be used against Trump is another. http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-09-20/money-laundering-scheme-exposed-14-pro-clinton-super-pacs-non-profits-implicated Their big AIDS initiative is another.

http://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/did-the-clinton-foundation-save-lives-or-cost-them/

How do honest ethical people have so many close associates and those with money ties to the Clintons that are under suspicion or under investigation for fraud? In addition is Clintons ridiculous explanation for her e-mail mess

[Bravus]

Of course, Trump *himself* is under investigation for fraud. Until he bought off a corrupt prosecutor.

A little more than just guilt by association.

 

[bonnie]

Using the criteria put forth by Tom,an attorney,Has it been proven? Do you have proof? I am not defending Trump,nor have I claimed Trump is honest and ethical as some here have claimed for Clinton. Our electricity comes from a nuclear power plant three miles from where we live. The husband's of some friends of mine are employed there, there is a lot of caution in employing someone Hillary Clinton would not even be considered.

She could not hold the positions my sons do let alone be considered as president for their companies

Yet some  see her "extremely careless" handling of classified e-mails,her claimed ignorance in not knowing what the  C stood for,having her minions destroy information after a subpoena and being told to preserve the information is seen a resume enhancement for President of the US.

If there isn't a problem with her dishonesty why have a problem with Trump's?

Or if it is a matter of not being proved in a court of law as Tom has said,shouldn't that apply to both?

[Tom Wetmore]

@bonnie - You are misrepresenting the point I was making about proof.  The point of that discussion was the double standard that is applied in public opinion about the two candidates.  One gets a pass on even credible evidence the media has reported of his corrupt business practices, his mob connections, serious foreign connections to enemies of the US, his illegal self dealing and prohibited political contributions from his foundation, his admitted immoral sexual conquests and marital infidelity, his pervasive and habitual lying, lack of transparency about his taxes, health and pretty much everything about himself and his positions on important issues, and even the ongoing fraud investigations and lawsuits against him and his businesses.  Any other candidate would have been completely pushed out of the contest long ago for any one of those. To the opposite effect, his poll numbers go up and his supporters double down in their enthusiasm about him.  Yet by comparison, if Hillary has a bad coughing episode, stumbles or looks tired, suddenly she is too old and sick to be president and her poll numbers drop.  She gets no break even after multiple intensive investigations that are clearly politically motivated turn up nothing of serious substance.  Nobody seems to move off what has been established by authorities to be nothing.  Ironically that is just exactly what you are trying to do in response to David.  

[bonnie]

18 minutes ago, Tom Wetmore said:

  One gets a pass on even credible evidence the media has reported of his corrupt business practices, his mob connections, serious foreign connections to enemies of the US, his illegal self dealing and prohibited political contributions from his foundation, his admitted immoral sexual conquests and marital infidelity, his pervasive and habitual lying, lack of transparency about his taxes, health and pretty much everything about himself and his positions on important issues, and even the ongoing fraud investigations and lawsuits against him and his businesses.  Any other candidate would have been completely pushed out of the contest long ago for any one of those. To the opposite effect, his poll numbers go up and his supporters double down in their enthusiasm about him.  Yet by comparison, if Hillary has a bad coughing episode, stumbles or looks tired, suddenly she is too old and sick to be president and her poll numbers drop.  She gets no break even after multiple intensive investigations that are clearly politically motivated turn up nothing of serious substance.  Nobody seems to move off what has been established by authorities to be nothing.  Ironically that is just exactly what you are trying to do in response to David.  

The above is exactly the way those opposed to Hillary Clinton feel. Having a cough or looking tired isnt the problem. It is that over half the country believes she lies. There has been more than a few incidences that have called her overall health into question. But of course if she causes her own problems it is the fault of someone else. What you cite as credible evidence against Trump isnt any different than what others believe to be credible concerning Clinton. As for misunderstanding you,I dont think so.  If evidence is destroyed that she was told to preserve after being served a subpoena it was compared to you burning the trash.No one could prove it would knowingly be connected to a investigation

[bonnie]

Nor can you deny that the woman that wants to be president could not and would not be hired where security clearance is required. This candidate is claiming all this experience, yet hasnt a clue how to handle classified information and cant recall a couple of dozen security?Security meetings and briefings .  Not everyone is that naive or so enamored with her that is even plausible