Where in the hell did you get the idea that a political party does not have a favorite in the wings. I don't care how much you spin this stuff, a political party is a private entity. If you don't like it start your own party.
Where in the hell did you get the idea that a political party does not have a favorite in the wings. I don't care how much you spin this stuff, a political party is a private entity. If you don't like it start your own party.Now that wasn't going to happen on the basis of one question, but this plus the rest of the pile of crap which the DNC has turned out to be shows that Hillary was given support from what should have been a neutral entity, Democrats being "high minded" and all. Of course if Hillary was principled she would have insisted the question be tossed out. Heh, right.
Well Trump or Hillary, we will get what we deserve and heaven help us.
The analogy is ludicrous. It compares Secretary Clinton to Mussolini. That's both hysterical and ludicrous.
Lol, sport, I got 779 on my first go 'round as a Junior on the SAT verbal, only prepping the night before with the pamphlet they give you. My guidance counselor told me not to expect such a high score when I took it again. As a Senior, I got an 781.No it doesn't and no he didn't. It's called an analogy and you probably did poorly on them when you took the SAT, that is if you took the SAT. Here's how it works:
Perknose:understanding as
A. moon:cheese
B. baseball:stapler
C. Hillary Clinton:ethics
Correct answer is C, the correct analogy is the person to something they don't possess. Notice that anology doesn't mean that we are comparing Perknose to Clinton, but rather each one of you separately to the concept that follows the colon.
The analogy is ludicrous. It compares Secretary Clinton to Mussolini. That's both hysterical and ludicrous.
Lol, sport, I got 779 on my first go 'round as a Junior on the SAT verbal, only prepping the night before with the pamphlet they give you. My guidance counselor told me not to expect such a high score when I took it again. As a Senior, I got an 781.
Now for the specifics. The analogy was, explicitly, Mussolini to Hitler, with Clinton as Mussolini and Trump as Hitler. So, yes, the OP was using a hysterically ludicrous analogy in which he compared Clinton to Mussolini in the context of Mussolini/Hitler being JUST LIKE Clinton/Trump.
That's hysterical, ludicrous, and wrong.
Got that? Good! Now put your pencil down, pencil head.
You demonstrated that your pile smells slightly less. It's like you saying that Mussolini should win because he wasn't Hitler.
smh. And again, you're not complaining about comparing Trump to Hitler. Whatever. So, pick any 2 undesirable candidates for an analogy. Neither are desirable.
It's a ridiculous choice of undesirables. Mussolini and Hitler are relatively similar despots with one being absolutely more terrible. Hitler is nothing like Mussolini and Trump is, actually, nothing like Hitler.
I imagine he masturbates to pictures of himself every night.
You lack the most basic of reading comprehension. I'll let someone else explain to you how embarrassing this post of yours is for you.
So much for the high minded idealists. Democrats strangled them all.
Hillary Clinton is a politician, and flawed, but is NOT by any measure despicable.
Donald Trump is a despicable lout, a shameless, whole cloth liar, and a world class ignoramus.
You trying to put them on the same continuum is arrant ideological bullshit, egregious rhetorical overreach.
Any candidate even remotely reasonable would be crushing Trump in the polls right now. The fact that it's still not a 20 point lead for illary is a testament to how bad she really is.
Likely not true. The country is so polarized that the days of 10%+ wins in popular vote are gone.
The country is indeed polarized, but Trump is disliked at historical levels. There has never been a candidate less liked than he is. It should be 70-30 at this point, except for the fact that she's even worse of a human than than he is.
Any candidate even remotely reasonable would be crushing Trump in the polls right now. The fact that it's still not a 20 point lead for illary is a testament to how bad she really is.
The country is indeed polarized, but Trump is disliked at historical levels. There has never been a candidate less liked than he is. It should be 70-30 at this point, except for the fact that she's even worse of a human than than he is.
Any candidate even remotely reasonable would be crushing Trump in the polls right now. The fact that it's still not a 20 point lead for illary is a testament to how bad she really is.
Note that Clinton and Trump are not being directly compared to Mussolini and Hitler. The comparison is between Hitler and Mussolini and how they are both terrible terrible people; one being 'better' than the other is largely meaningless. The same concept is being extended to Clinton and Trump through the use of an analogy - both are terrible candidates and the point being made is that one is hardly better than the other. Furthering the idea that it is this concept and not the people in question being compared is that fact that Mussolini and Hitler are completely replaceable as far as the argument goes. We could have Mao and Stalin and the point would still perfectly stand.
The post itself says what it is trying to show.
Nah, no brinksmanship. This is just Putin trying to get his way without making the required donation to the Clinton Family Foundation.I stand with Hayabusa.
You went out of your way to get the corporatist neocon and that will be your just due.I just wonder how brinkmanship with Russia tastes. The anti-Russia hysteria is insane around here. From reset button to nuclear button. Internet's social media has enabled humanity's baser instincts of being a pack of wolves. In this election we now face our true nature.
Agreed. Mussolini was way more honest and transparent than Clinton.The analogy is ludicrous. It compares Secretary Clinton to Mussolini. That's both hysterical and ludicrous.
Agreed. Mussolini was way more honest and transparent than Clinton.
Although they both did want to rule Libya . . .
Now that wasn't going to happen on the basis of one question, but this plus the rest of the pile of crap which the DNC has turned out to be shows that Hillary was given support from what should have been a neutral entity, Democrats being "high minded" and all. Of course if Hillary was principled she would have insisted the question be tossed out. Heh, right.
Well Trump or Hillary, we will get what we deserve and heaven help us.