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

Hillary has been doing this for thirty years, and nothing!

page: 2
23
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 20 2016 @ 09:46 AM
link   
a reply to: Greggers

yes but, if she couldn`t round up enough support for her ideas in 30 years what makes her,or anyone else, think she will be able to get that support if she is elected president?
she has been caught red handed lying to congress so she isn`t going to be getting any support for her ideas and plans from congress,and as you said no individual politician has dictatorial authority, that includes a president Hillary.




posted on Oct, 20 2016 @ 09:46 AM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Too busy doing what? And if you say "making money", does that mean Hillary was doing it right for 30 years after all?
edit on 10/20/2016 by kosmicjack because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 20 2016 @ 09:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: Hazardous1408

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Hazardous1408

You question someone's patriotism because they don't run from president. Millions upon millions of Americans are not patriots then. Just a ridiculous argument.


No I question the patriotism of those in a position to run for president who also claim the system is rigged and that for 30 years its been a shambles.

Your simplified analysis is a strawman.


He took a run in 2000, but you don't mention that.


I had forgot that, but it matters not because it's a red herring.

His platform was completely different and he wasn't running based on the idea that for "30 years" it had been a mess.

Next.



posted on Oct, 20 2016 @ 09:49 AM
link   
a reply to: kosmicjack

Are those rhetorical questions? Arguments turning into questions is a bad sign of where this discussion is going.



posted on Oct, 20 2016 @ 09:49 AM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope


Then your thread is just a massive fallacy.


You don't seem to have a problem with Trump's "30 years" nonsense which is a whole bundle of fallacy (false equivalence, cherry picking, etc). You just keep lowering that bar!


We have the last 30 years of Donald's life on record. He was fairly busy during that time.


So much groping, so little time. It's amazing with all that bribery, outsourcing, tax avoidance, bankruptcy, etc that he managed to find the time to heap praise on both of the Clintons for many of those years.



posted on Oct, 20 2016 @ 09:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Greggers




I'm no fan of Hillary Clinton, but his entire argument here appears to be that Hillary wasn't able to single-handedly resolve every problem encountered by our Republic during her 30 years in office.


I totally agree with your assessment. To think any one person can dictate change and force an entire legislative body to align themselves with her, simply shows how ignorant Trump is on the legislative process. The level headed voters realize this argument is ridiculous.



posted on Oct, 20 2016 @ 09:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Hazardous1408

That's convenient isn't it.



posted on Oct, 20 2016 @ 09:51 AM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

Politics is fallacious. Both trump and Hilary are sophists. I've never stated otherwise.



posted on Oct, 20 2016 @ 09:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: Hazardous1408
Says Donald Trump...
Which true or not, raises a question...

Trump has benefited from this for 30 years...
If it was such a problem to him, what took him so long to finally give a f*ck..?


Well, you have to be fair as to the position the Trump has held as an American over the past 30 years--he has not been in Congress, the presidency, state politics, city politics, or any type of official politics where he could have made much of a difference. So, like myriad Americans do every year, he tried to make the best out of the situation that these politicians were creating, to include the Clintons.

That said, I'm quite skeptical as to the sincerity of ANY politician who asserts that they suddenly give a big enough s**t to start advocating massive changes. I'm quite certain that the bulk of what he says is either pandering, or things that he knows that Congress must do and that he doesn't have he authority to enact, so I don't think that we need put much stock in what he's claiming as he's running for president.



posted on Oct, 20 2016 @ 09:52 AM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

I'll take your non-answer as a rhetorical concession.



posted on Oct, 20 2016 @ 09:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Hazardous1408

That's convenient isn't it.


Actually it is convenient.
For him.
It proves he is a populist pandering to a base.
Trump Dump



posted on Oct, 20 2016 @ 09:55 AM
link   
Most people are too busy actually earning a living to run for office, particularly higher offices like congress, senate, and Presidency.

This is why we've seen the rise of the professional politician. Many of which have done very little in the private sector. They've set the system up to protect themselves from outsiders. This is how you get these bojangling congressman who can serve 20 years or more with no legitimate challengers even though they can't point to sh*t as an accomplishment even locally.

Trump's question is legitimate. Too many of these politicians have served for decades and have very little to show in terms of real accomplishments. They then latch on to an issue ignoring that if the issue was so important, they've had plenty of time to address it in the past but chose not to until it was politically convenient.



posted on Oct, 20 2016 @ 09:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: Hazardous1408

originally posted by: southbeach
a reply to: Hazardous1408

Clinton a career politician that never produced a product nor started a profitable business but self enriched by play for play because of her position is dripping in Gold by selling Uranium contracts to the Russians for 25 million in her back pocket and stealing 94 percent of Clinton Foundation Haiti fund and still raking it in today versus Trump a business man with zero political power?





Blah blah blah.

None of that related to my OP question.
Clown.

Silly boy...stick your insults back in your toolbox...lol.



posted on Oct, 20 2016 @ 09:59 AM
link   
a reply to: Hazardous1408

There is nothing wrong with populism. When populism is aligned with corruption is where you get your problems.



posted on Oct, 20 2016 @ 10:04 AM
link   
a reply to: southbeach

Lol. I apologise I just wanted it to be a proper Mudpit thread.

No offence intended.



posted on Oct, 20 2016 @ 10:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: Tardacus
a reply to: Greggers

yes but, if she couldn`t round up enough support for her ideas in 30 years what makes her,or anyone else, think she will be able to get that support if she is elected president?



If you're going to evaluate a politician's 30 years in office, you must evaluate the following objectively:

1) The bills they championed, and their track record getting them done.
2) The bills they voted for, or against, and their impact on the country

Again, picking current election topics and asking why she didn't fix them 30 years ago is a ridiculous way to assess any candidate.

As far as your point about Hillary's inability to get things done, I think it's pretty clear she's a more skilled politician than Trump, who seems like he would bulldoze his way through 4 years of alienating everyone who might otherwise support and champion his ideas.


edit on 20-10-2016 by Greggers because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 20 2016 @ 10:30 AM
link   
a reply to: Hazardous1408

Hillary has been indirectly or directly involved in politics for 30 years, her most major accomplishment was putting out a bill to change the name of a post office if I remember right. For that 30 years there has been literally nothing to benefit the people, all her work has been directed to her own benefit, self gratification and aggrandizement. Most recently the state department fiasco and pay to play. She was in a position to do great good, but did not, she paid a few at the cost of many to make herself rich. Politics is service to one's country, not dis-service.

Donald Trump has been a businessman for 30 years and his primary purpose was also self gratification through creating profit, the side issue is that he employed many to make that profit. Getting into politics costs a wack of money, businessmen take calculated risks and in the first 29 years the risk potential for making change was probably to great compared to the personal cost and other burdens. Trump paid many at the cost of a few (if one considers his only bankruptcy and 3 successful chapter 11 restructurings as a cost) to make himself rich. Business is service to oneself, your shareholders and employees

I really don't see how anyone can support Clinton in anything, she did not do her job, Trump did.

Cheers - Dave
edit on 10/20.2016 by bobs_uruncle because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 20 2016 @ 10:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: theantediluvian

She had plenty to do with Hilarycare, which occurred while she was First Lady.

How long ago was that?

The health security act did not pass. Any more nonsense you want to throw out?



posted on Oct, 20 2016 @ 10:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: Hazardous1408
Says Donald Trump...
Which true or not, raises a question...

Trump has benefited from this for 30 years...
If it was such a problem to him, what took him so long to finally give a f*ck..?


I am pretty anti-trump, but this is a easy enough question.
He has been benefitting from all the insane policys and codes of the US system...now that he has his fortunes, he is looking to legacy, and realizing super rich people are not remembered, it is the people who change systems that are..so in his mind, he may actually be altruistic here..but chances are he simply wants to be required reading for american students for the next hundred years.



posted on Oct, 20 2016 @ 10:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: Hazardous1408

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Hazardous1408

Then your thread is just a massive fallacy.

We have the last 30 years of Donald's life on record. He was fairly busy during that time.


Yep, The Apprentice must have been way too important to think about Making America Great Again.

No he was too busy conning people and banks out of their money not to mention sucking up to the Russians and molesting women. Yeah Donnie has been busy.



new topics

top topics



 
23
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join