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.

 

Russia confirms having had contact with Hillary Clinton's campaign in the 2016 election

page: 4
39
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 13 2017 @ 09:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: mOjOm

The Clinton Campaign is responsible for people losing over a billion dollars.



Trump lost a billion in a year.




posted on Mar, 13 2017 @ 09:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: Gryphon66

Truly Historical.



Right ... so those 107,005 votes counted for more than 2.8 million.

Yeah, that seems fair and right doesn't it? The Republic is saved from the Democratic hordes.



posted on Mar, 13 2017 @ 09:36 PM
link   
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

wrong, trump carried 30 states, clinton 20. the only reason she got more popular votes is that she won new york and california.
which are two of the most populous states in the U.S., including U.S. citizens and illegals. this is exactly why the founders set up the electoral college, so heavy populated areas could not control the outcomes of elections.


edit on 13-3-2017 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)


ETA: and seeing how many people live in those two states, and which way they lean. to only get 2.8 million more popular votes across the country doesn't say a whole lot.

also all the talk about unfaithful electors not vetoing the way their states went, you do know that more bailed on hillary than trump.

Not only did it not happen, but more electors tried to defect from Hillary Clinton Monday than from Trump, by a count of eight to two. Three Democratic electors in Maine, Minnesota, and Colorado tried to vote for candidates other than Clinton. The electors' votes, however, were disallowed because of state rules binding them to the statewide popular vote winner.
Donald Trump Secures Electoral College Win, With Few Surprises


edit on 13-3-2017 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)

edit on 13-3-2017 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 13 2017 @ 09:37 PM
link   
Without California (replete with illegal votes), Bill Clinton's wife was 1.3 million votes behind President Trump nationally. Had there been a contest for popular votes, both campaigns would have adjusted accordingly and Bill Clinton's wife would have still lost.

Trump is president. He won fair and square based upon the Constitution. Bill Clinton's wife lost. The Left lost.

America won!



posted on Mar, 13 2017 @ 09:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

Fumble Flop.

I never said anything about 2.8 million votes.




posted on Mar, 13 2017 @ 10:14 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Think it through.



posted on Mar, 13 2017 @ 10:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: xuenchen

Think it through.


No




posted on Mar, 13 2017 @ 10:23 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Spoil sport.




posted on Mar, 13 2017 @ 10:33 PM
link   
Yeah California set a new record for voter turnout in 2016 elections, but I'm sure voter fraud is super difficult, and if you're already here illegally why vote and put yourself at risk, why vote at all even...
Call her what she is Bill Clinton's wife.
Some poster suggested Putin saw her as weak and feeble so machined Trump to win and was surprised by how well he did... Seriously America saw how bad USSR were doing and just had to ruin you economically don't bring your bad press is good press nonsense here.
"In other news covert American operatives are spreading anti establishment corruption scandals throughout our great country of Russia, there will now be two names on the election ballots to prove our good faith in you Citizen, 1st Vladimir 2nd Putin."
Seriously though the 2 party system is flawed!



posted on Mar, 13 2017 @ 10:46 PM
link   
a reply to: SBMcG

I'm not against him as president because he beat Hillary, I don't like Her either and wouldn't vote for her. But he sux too and he's just not good at this. I also just find it funny that even though Trump won, even if just by the electoral college, you still have to insist he won with small adjustments like not counting Cali votes.

It's the same as the crowd size, hand size, etc. It's all just such a dick measuring contest and business man BS that he's selling all the time but some of you still claim it's just what we needed. I mean to not admit it's a freakin joke and looking like just another f-you to the middle and poor and big rewards for all the super rich, like every member of the cabinet.



posted on Mar, 13 2017 @ 10:48 PM
link   
a reply to: BeneGesseritWitch

So are you Russian??



posted on Mar, 13 2017 @ 11:09 PM
link   
And if we were to decide to just randomly for some reason exclude Texas, Clinton was 3.2 million votes ahead of Trump.

We can arbitrarily run "what if scenarios" to make it look like anything we want.

The facts are that Trump won the Electoral College by a very thin margin in terms of recent Presidential Elections and only George W. Bush won by smaller margins.

More Americans who voted voted against Donald Trump than for him.

Now, by our Constitution (which, by the way, make it ridiculous to talk about "excluding States" from an Election) Trump did win the Electoral College. As it stands now, there's no question he is President.

But any reasonable person, especially one that wants to be America's President would look at the Election results and take into account the will of the majority, or at least temper his current extremist agenda.



posted on Mar, 13 2017 @ 11:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: allsee4eye

Russia hasn't confirmed anything!

The article you linked conveniently offers no names of these so called Hillary "think tank" individuals, nor dates of any alleged meetings or events with Ambassador Kislyak


“Well, if you look at some people connected with Hillary Clinton during her campaign, you would probably see that he had lots of meetings of that kind,” Dmitry Peskov told CNN “GPS” host Fareed Zakaria. “There are lots of specialists in politology, people working in think tanks advising Hillary or advising people working for Hillary.”


Probably?

We've got names and dates of top Trump campaign advisors/cabinet members meeting with the Ambassador. This seems like another pretty lame attempt of the Kremlin trying to bail their boy Trumpy out....just like how WikiLeaks sprung into sve mode, conveniently releasing "Vault 7" after Trump's tweets accusing Obama "wiretapped" his personal phones put him on the spot! So transparent!



Evidently nobody told the intelligence agencies to monitor Hillary's people. I wonder why they only checked on Trumps? Could it be that A democratic president's appointed people were just investigating Trump in case he mysteriously won?

I doubt if there is going to be any evidence collected on Hillary's campaign, In fact, there will be denial of any contact at all and the people who were supposedly talking to the Ambassador will just disappear.



posted on Mar, 13 2017 @ 11:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: seasonal

The majority spoke and they voted for Hillary. Don't believe me? Look at the popular vote.


And thank god we don't go by the popular vote. Otherwise, it'd be majority rule coming from California and New York. A Democrat politicians wet dream...



posted on Mar, 13 2017 @ 11:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: seasonal

The majority spoke and they voted for Hillary. Don't believe me? Look at the popular vote.


And thank god we don't go by the popular vote. Otherwise, it'd be majority rule coming from California and New York. A Democrat politicians wet dream...


Another point is, if the Constitution required a popular vote, national election campaigns would be run differently.

Trump clubbed Bill Clinton's wife to death wherever they went head-to-head. I have no doubt that in the big media markets of Cali and the NE, had Trump competed there in any real way, he would have had an even bigger victory over her than he had in the Electoral Vote.



posted on Mar, 13 2017 @ 11:54 PM
link   
a reply to: rickymouse



Evidently nobody told the intelligence agencies to monitor Hillary's people.


What evidence brings you to "evidently"? I suppose if there were any kind of red flags, like with Trump's campaign, or if Hillary's people were acting suspiciously, like some of Trumpo's people were, then they would be being monitored too.



I wonder why they only checked on Trumps?


How do you know "they" were only looking at Trump's campaign? All we know is that Trump's campaign benefited from Russian interference, while many of Trump's people were quietly being very cozy with Russians, Trump called on Russia to "find" Hillary's emails and praised and fawned over Putin like a high school girl with a rock star crush.

In the meantime, Hillary was under investigation for her emails, the Clinton Foundation and "Benghazi" refused to go away. Hillary got no free ride.
edit on 13-3-2017 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 13 2017 @ 11:57 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

56.5% to 42.2% of the electoral vote is not a thin margin. that's a full 15 points, double digits is not considered to be slim.

trump 304 electoral votes 56.5% percent clinton 227 electoral votes 42.2% percent.

or to put it another way she was 43 votes shy, he was 34 over, or he beat her by 77 electoral votes, that's certainly not a thin margin.
edit on 14-3-2017 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 13 2017 @ 11:59 PM
link   
One of the fundamental ideas of our Republic is "one person - one vote."

The votes in the Electoral College are not distributed fairly by population. Therefore, votes in some states count for more than votes in other states.

Furthermore ... the Presidency is the only nationally elected Office. Based on our fundamental principles, the will of every American should be heard equally.



posted on Mar, 14 2017 @ 12:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: rickymouse



Evidently nobody told the intelligence agencies to monitor Hillary's people.


What evidence brings you to "evidently"? I suppose if there were any kind of red flags, like with Trump's campaign, or if Hillary's people were acting suspiciously, like some of Trumpo's people were, then they would be being monitored too.



I wonder why they only checked on Trumps?


How do you know "they" were only looking at Trump's campaign? All we know is that Trump's campaign benefited from Russian interference, while many of Trump's people were quietly being very cozy with Russians, Trump called on Russia to "find" Hillary's emails and praised and fawned over Putin like a high school girl with a rock star crush.

In the meantime, Hillary was under investigation for her emails, the Clinton Foundation and "Benghazi" refused to go away. Hillary got no free ride.


I live in the real world, I can see what is right in front of my eyes. I've been around for a long time. I have known people who worked in congress and I know a few people working for the government in DC.

Are you blind as a bat or what, don't you know how this society works?



posted on Mar, 14 2017 @ 12:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
a reply to: Gryphon66

56.5% to 42.2% of the electoral vote is not a thin margin. that's a full 15 points, double digits is not considered to be slim.

trump 304 electoral votes 56.5% percent clinton 227 electoral votes 42.2% percent.

or to put it another way she was 43 votes shy, he was 34 over, or he beat her by 77 electoral votes, that's certainly not a thin margin.


Electoral College wins:

Clinton 92: 370
Bush: 168
Difference: 202

Clinton 96: 379
Dole: 159
Difference: 220

Bush II 00: 271
Gore: 266
Difference: 5

Bush II 04:286
Kerry: 251
Difference: 35

Obama 08: 395
McCain: 173
Difference: 222

Obama 12: 332
Romney 206
Difference: 126

Trump 16: 304
Clinton: 227
Difference: 77

Now, have I done enough of the math to prove that of recent Presidents, the only one lower than Trump in the EC was George W. Bush?



new topics

top topics



 
39
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join