News68 mins ago
Hillary Clinton's Rampant Hypocracy
53 Answers
Hillary [21-10-2016]: “Donald Trump refused to say that he'd respect the results of this election. By doing that, he's threatening our democracy.”
Hillary [25-08-2020]: “Joe Biden should not concede under *any* circumstances.”
If I've said it once, I've said it a thousand times: the political left always accuse their political opponents of the very thing they themselves are guilty of. It's pathological projection. They simply can't help it.
Hillary [25-08-2020]: “Joe Biden should not concede under *any* circumstances.”
If I've said it once, I've said it a thousand times: the political left always accuse their political opponents of the very thing they themselves are guilty of. It's pathological projection. They simply can't help it.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by birdie1971. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
// If I've said it once, I've said it a thousand times://
the very best crap is on AB in the largest quantity
one is in the past - so sort of was true
and the other is to come
and therefore cannot be compared
hey - sort of joke - why is Trump like Indira Gandhi (*)
they both foment unrest in distant parts (+)
and then take the opportunity to impose central control
(+) Portland Oregon
(*) cue the usual suspects asking earnestly:
1) who she den
2) she a man vat fella in a dhoti - spinny-man, didnt eat much, founded a dynasty . him den
3) and many many more vacant questions in a quest for knowledge
the very best crap is on AB in the largest quantity
one is in the past - so sort of was true
and the other is to come
and therefore cannot be compared
hey - sort of joke - why is Trump like Indira Gandhi (*)
they both foment unrest in distant parts (+)
and then take the opportunity to impose central control
(+) Portland Oregon
(*) cue the usual suspects asking earnestly:
1) who she den
2) she a man vat fella in a dhoti - spinny-man, didnt eat much, founded a dynasty . him den
3) and many many more vacant questions in a quest for knowledge
"one is in the past - so sort of was true "
Good one PP.... is/was that pre- or post- revisionism ?
I certainly do not know what goes on behind the scenes in USA politics, but perhaps the charade of ' YOUR! , democratic vote' choosing (ha ha!) between Tweedledee and Tweedledum was in danger of losing ALL credibility:
"The National parties and their presidential candidates, with the Eastern Establishment assiduously fostering the process behind the scenes, moved closer together and nearly met in the center with almost identical candidates and platforms, although the process was concealed as much as possible, by the revival of obsolescent or meaningless war cries and slogans (often going back to the Civil War)....The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to the doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can "throw the rascals out" at any election without leading to any profound or extreme shifts in policy. ... Either party in office becomes in time corrupt, tired, unenterprising, and vigorless. Then it should be possible to replace it, every four years if necessary, by the other party, which will be none of these things but will still pursue, with new vigor, approximately the same basic policies." ( Carroll Quigley 1966 )
Good one PP.... is/was that pre- or post- revisionism ?
I certainly do not know what goes on behind the scenes in USA politics, but perhaps the charade of ' YOUR! , democratic vote' choosing (ha ha!) between Tweedledee and Tweedledum was in danger of losing ALL credibility:
"The National parties and their presidential candidates, with the Eastern Establishment assiduously fostering the process behind the scenes, moved closer together and nearly met in the center with almost identical candidates and platforms, although the process was concealed as much as possible, by the revival of obsolescent or meaningless war cries and slogans (often going back to the Civil War)....The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to the doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can "throw the rascals out" at any election without leading to any profound or extreme shifts in policy. ... Either party in office becomes in time corrupt, tired, unenterprising, and vigorless. Then it should be possible to replace it, every four years if necessary, by the other party, which will be none of these things but will still pursue, with new vigor, approximately the same basic policies." ( Carroll Quigley 1966 )
Unrelated to the OP, but why has the Democrats' "solution" to defeating a President whose entire pitch is anti-establishment been to select two people who personify that establishment? One First Lady and one veep. No imagination at all. If the Democrats do lose the White House, then they deserve to have lost for showing no imagination at all.
Directly relevant to the Hillary quote in the OP, it is possible Trump fears that nationwide postal voting could effect a dangerous increase in the number of votes cast, and hence Trump's attacks on the US Postal Service and him allowing removal of US Postal sorting machines.(ie he could lose if 'too many' actually did vote - in 2016 ~55% voted )
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles87 mins ago
ChatterBank103 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles134 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles158 mins ago
ChatterBank166 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.