It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Who is more Dangerous, Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton ?

page: 1
11
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 18 2016 @ 06:10 AM
link   
The Democrats keep pushing their political negative agenda by trying to paint Trump as
an egotistical maniac wno loves war.

Over and over they spend millions of dollars for TV advertising repeating the same off the cuff statements
Trump has made to emphasize his image as a no nonsense leader willng
to fight for America - Obviously Trump is no politician and has not yet learned the
political art.

Hillary Clinton on the other hand is an expert at political machinations, after all
she is the wife of that other great master of truth distortion her husband former President
Bill Clinton - famous for being only the second President impeached while in office.
- But as Hillary would tell you with a straight face, that was part of the 'vast right wing conspiracy'

And so what if the Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, mis-handles Emails dealing with
national security? When you're a Clinton national security is never an issue
- especially if you represent and answer to, other groups and agencies dealing with
the rest of the world first and the USA second- the so called New World Order.

So who is more dangerous Trump or Clinton? Depends on your beliefs and your priorities.
If you believe in Clinton and the Clinton Foundations New Werld Order mentality
controlled by super-rich international socialists - Then Trump is indeed dangerous
[why some of the cabal from within the Republican party are so against him].

But if you believe in the United States of America, and that the President of this nation
should consider America and its people first - Then Hillary Clinton and the cabal supporting her
is the most dangerous threat the USA has faced since the fascist mind set of Word War II.

And for the first time since Ross Perot you have what is essentially an independent
[who may win] running for what many would consider the most powerful position in the World
- Political 'insiders' from both parties see him as a threat to the same old
maintaim the 'status quo' New World Order mentality of insider politcal control.
- To 'them' he is the greater threat.

So who is the graater threat


- What did the 'insider' who lost say?: "Vote your conscience"





“Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children what it was once like in the United States where men were free.”
― Ronald Reagan




“As government expands, liberty contracts.”
― Ronald Reagan



edit on 18-9-2016 by AlienView because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 18 2016 @ 06:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: AlienView
The Democrats keep pushing their political negative agenda by trying to paint Trump as an egotistical maniac who loves war.


For arguments sake let's pretend that it's a legitimate worry.

They counter that with Hillary who has already demonstrate those exact traits with actual actions?

So we're to elect Hillary over Trump because he might do the very things Hillary has already demonstrated a propensity for.

With Trump we get a maybe. With Hillary I've already seen what she's like with a political position and found her highly unworthy to hold one, especially one involving national security.

"Don't elect this candidate because they "might" do the very same thing our candidate has already shown she "will" do and "has" done before." It's absurd logic.
edit on 9/18/2016 by Puppylove because: better clarity



posted on Sep, 18 2016 @ 06:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: Puppylove

originally posted by: AlienView
The Democrats keep pushing their political negative agenda by trying to paint Trump as an egotistical maniac who loves war.

"Don't elect this candidate because they "might" do the very same thing our candidate has already shown she "will" do and "has" done before." It's absurd logic.


That's a fine example of Liberal pretzel logic.



posted on Sep, 18 2016 @ 06:40 AM
link   
a reply to: AlienView

Who do I think is more dangerous? Let's take a look at the big picture to see if anything is going to really change, shall we...

Donald Trump: vows US military build-up, proposing more troops, ships, warplanes

Hillary Clinton: We should maintain the best-trained, best-equipped, and strongest military the world has ever known.nnn




posted on Sep, 18 2016 @ 06:46 AM
link   
a reply to: Sublimecraft

Yep. Hillary is a Rhino at her core, and her policies and actions as Secretary of State prove it.



posted on Sep, 18 2016 @ 07:01 AM
link   
a reply to: AlienView

Internationally?

World leaders don't want to do business with Trump. This'll undermine the influence of the US on the international stage and isolate the US from key decisions. There's liable to be an economic trade-off on that too as investment could be shy with the domestic instability.

Clinton will be fine with world leaders, but promises to continue the current course of action in the Middle East. This is partially responsible for the unstable state of the world and inspires the Jihadi psychotics and morons. Repercussions will probably include continued domestic terror alerts and increasingly strenuous homeland surveillance.

I'd guess Clinton represents predictable 'dangers' and Trump is more of an unpredictable 'danger.' To paraphrase you-know-who, it's about known knowns and unknown knowns



posted on Sep, 18 2016 @ 07:11 AM
link   
a reply to: AlienView

I'd have to guess that HRC is the single greatest threat the Republic and the American way of life have ever faced. She will be an unmitigated disaster; she'll sell out US sovereignty to the NWO cabal at a frightening pace; she'll do all she can to eviscerate, if not eliminate the Second Amendment and her anti-business practices will cause untold economic damage. With HRC in office and the Dems taking the Senate, they'll be able to actuate their dream of turning the entire nation into Flint/Detroit.

But, nonetheless, she'll doubtless win the election. And Atlas will shrug.



posted on Sep, 18 2016 @ 07:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kandinsky
a reply to: AlienView

Internationally?

World leaders don't want to do business with Trump. This'll undermine the influence of the US on the international stage and isolate the US from key decisions. There's liable to be an economic trade-off on that too as investment could be shy with the domestic instability.

Clinton will be fine with world leaders, but promises to continue the current course of action in the Middle East. This is partially responsible for the unstable state of the world and inspires the Jihadi psychotics and morons. Repercussions will probably include continued domestic terror alerts and increasingly strenuous homeland surveillance.

I'd guess Clinton represents predictable 'dangers' and Trump is more of an unpredictable 'danger.' To paraphrase you-know-who, it's about known knowns and unknown knowns



And how do we know that?

Gee, it's not like they can actually get on without our aid and money.

F'k em if they don't wanna play.

Oh yeah, hillary is more dangerous.


edit on 9 18 2016 by burgerbuddy because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2016 @ 07:28 AM
link   
a reply to: Kandinsky




World leaders don't want to do business with Trump.


Putin wants too, and that is a good thing.
And the others, they will kiss the ring once they see Trump has taken control of all three branches of American government.



posted on Sep, 18 2016 @ 07:32 AM
link   
They're equally as dangerous as one another because they both have the same bosses and handlers.

This whole election is just a side show to make us think we have a choice, but more importantly it is being used to divide us, just look at the atmosphere around these boards lately, not to mention in the real world, it is working like a charm.



posted on Sep, 18 2016 @ 07:48 AM
link   
The danger doesn't come from the Presidency. The danger comes from non-government organizations.

ALEC writes laws favorable to large corporations, then has lawmakers push them through Congress.

The CFR dictates US foreign policy.

The Federal Reserve controls the economy.

The occupant of the office of President can either play ball or get marginalized. If they become a problem, they can be dealt with.



posted on Sep, 18 2016 @ 07:49 AM
link   
Hillary is way more dangerous. Just look at what her foreign policy has done to the world. She represents everything that I despise in American politics in what has become an oligarchy. The establishment needs to go and I'm including both parties.



posted on Sep, 18 2016 @ 07:50 AM
link   
Hillary represents a ramping up of the current status quo situation between government, corporations, and globalism. I see how many people rail against it and hate it. She will inject steroids into it and she makes no apologies for that.

Trump is an complete unknown. He may be wildly different. He may not. He represents the unknown.

So for me, this comes to down to what scares you more: The continuance and worsening of the status quo ... or ?.



posted on Sep, 18 2016 @ 07:54 AM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

The status quo on steroids terrifies me. I might get it either way, but one way I know leads to it. Therefore I can't choose Hillary.

A chance for something better, or even delaying these bastards is worth the risk of the unknown.

If the only choice is Russian Roulette or a fully loaded gun, I'll take Russian Roulette.

I may die with either option, but at least with one there's a chance of a future.
edit on 9/18/2016 by Puppylove because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2016 @ 08:12 AM
link   
The net sum of these two posts...


originally posted by: Sublimecraft
a reply to: AlienView

Who do I think is more dangerous? Let's take a look at the big picture to see if anything is going to really change, shall we...

Donald Trump: vows US military build-up, proposing more troops, ships, warplanes

Hillary Clinton: We should maintain the best-trained, best-equipped, and strongest military the world has ever known.nnn




originally posted by: VictorVonDoom
The danger doesn't come from the Presidency. The danger comes from non-government organizations.

ALEC writes laws favorable to large corporations, then has lawmakers push them through Congress.

The CFR dictates US foreign policy.

The Federal Reserve controls the economy.

The occupant of the office of President can either play ball or get marginalized. If they become a problem, they can be dealt with.


... among many other reasons, are why I can't feel at peace with my conscience voting for either of them.

They may appear to present a stark distinction between one another, but they both advocate and say they hope for enough that is either the same, or just different flavors of things I can't personally support, that for me it makes little difference in terms of the, "Could I sleep at night after voting for them?" factor.

Who's more dangerous? I don't know. I can't predict the future. Neither is safe enough for me to sleep at night after voting for them personally.

Peace.
edit on 9/18/2016 by AceWombat04 because: Typo



posted on Sep, 18 2016 @ 08:19 AM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

Trump is an unknown, but considered a political and establishment outsider. He's not "one of them". He's not amongst the American elite, as Newt Gingrich said he didn't take the "initiation rights." For anyone thatvstill think thats a conspiracy theory, its real. There is a group of politicians from both sides that represnt the establishmwnt and not the american people.

Trump is not a globalist, not a true conservative or republican, not a true democrat or liberal. He's hard to like but easy to like at the same time. He's the worst politician and the most clever at the same time. He can't can't easily be smeared bc it helps him. He has the msm essentially grasping at straws at this point bc anyone else would have been over by now. It's so easy to hate this guy and love him at the same time.

For anyone to say he's going to cause WW3 are probably the same people who agree with Obama getting g the Nobel Peace prize before he did a thing. In other words they have no n idea what they are talking about. I'm not with that line of thought.



posted on Sep, 18 2016 @ 08:45 AM
link   
Donald Trump by far.

Hillary is not dangerous. Just secretive. Probably because she's been dogged by republicans since she became a democrat. They're still mad about losing their smartest member.



posted on Sep, 18 2016 @ 08:49 AM
link   
Donald is an egotistical maniac. We're not painting him that way. These are perfecctly focused photos of him.



posted on Sep, 18 2016 @ 08:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

Secretive? That's kind of an understatement.



posted on Sep, 18 2016 @ 08:50 AM
link   
a reply to: mkultra11

Psssst. Don't engage it, it might go away.



new topics

top topics



 
11
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join