Politics Vote for a president of USA - 2016 election

Pick a president.

  • Hillary Clinton

    Votes: 11 20.8%
  • Bernie Sanders

    Votes: 11 20.8%
  • Ted Cruz

    Votes: 3 5.7%
  • Marco Rubio

    Votes: 4 7.5%
  • Donald Trump

    Votes: 24 45.3%

  • Total voters
    53
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
What Sanders should have said to his supporters, was to vote for no body...................likewise in the republican camp

I personally think he missed a great opportunity to strike some sort of arrangement with Jill Stein and take his supporters with him. Now they seem split three ways between Stein, Clinton and Trump, which doesn't help anyone but Clinton and Trump.
 
No it does not. No where does it explicitly mention that Trump supporters were looking these things up. In fact, it does not mention anyone in specific except internet users.


As far as we know it could have been all Hillary supporters who googled to look up the terms, there is no way to conclude that the phenomena was restricted to Trump supporters, that's wishful thinking on Andy Borowitz's part who is an ardent liberal and writer for the famously left wing "New Yorker". There is no way to know what demographic actually looked up the terms. Since liberal sources that are against Trump would be more likely to report this story it is fair to say that the majority could have been anti Trump just as fair as it is for you to speculate that the people looking up the terms supported Trump. The article is constructed to coerce you into thinking a certain way.
(Although Hawking's response to Lewandowski was very amusing, he has a wonderful sense of humor)




This is a logical fallacy, a classic false dichotomy.

Also I doubt you have met many Trump supporters to even begin to make an assertion like this.

As a Latvian citizen I know you must be concerned about who we pick for president though since the threat of Russia is very real for your nation. It is ironic that Obama and the Democrats have let Russia waltz right into Ukraine and let them take the entirety of Crimea and allowed them to occupy much of the Donbass. As Russia's neighbor and having a large minority of ethnic Russians the Baltic states and Ukraine need our support, unfortantely we have failed that duty to a large extent so far




I was not the one who unhelpfulled him either but Lebrok deserved it, he was purposefully sharing misleading information that he knew was not the full story. He has more character than that. I'm glad I'm not the only one who actually fact checks and doesn't simply consume media to reinforce a preconceived bias. Trump isn't perfect, he isn't even halfway close to perfect, but it's desperate when people try to claim that he is a business failure when they dont even understand what they are reading about him.

it might be the next trap the democrats will step in
claiming that Trump and his voters are stupid

if democrats do so, it might very well backfire on them
 
Last edited:
This is a logical fallacy, a classic false dichotomy.

Also I doubt you have met many Trump supporters to even begin to make an assertion like this.

As a Latvian citizen I know you must be concerned about who we pick for president though since the threat of Russia is very real for your nation. It is ironic that Obama and the Democrats have let Russia waltz right into Ukraine and let them take the entirety of Crimea and allowed them to occupy much of the Donbass. As Russia's neighbor and having a large minority of ethnic Russians the Baltic states and Ukraine need our support, unfortantely we have failed that duty to a large extent so far
It is not a logical fallacy. Do you think Mr Putin is stupid? No. Do you think his local Russian supporters are particularly smart?
 
It is not a logical fallacy.

"There are two types of Trump supporters, smart people seeking personal gain and everyone else, who are stupid," is certainly a fallacious false dichotomy. Come on.
 
I think there are two types of support. Obviously Trump is playing some game (or is being played by someone) that means he should be smart or have smart advisers. The top level supporters he has also may take part in that game and expect some sort of benefit. The moral of that is questionable, but yeah, they are not stupid.
Other type of support is someone voting for Trump based on his rhetoric. Now that borderlines stupidity. Especially the foreign affairs part. The only part we actually care in Europe :)
This is a logical fallacy, a classic false dichotomy.

Also I doubt you have met many Trump supporters to even begin to make an assertion like this.

As a Latvian citizen I know you must be concerned about who we pick for president though since the threat of Russia is very real for your nation. It is ironic that Obama and the Democrats have let Russia waltz right into Ukraine and let them take the entirety of Crimea and allowed them to occupy much of the Donbass. As Russia's neighbor and having a large minority of ethnic Russians the Baltic states and Ukraine need our support, unfortantely we have failed that duty to a large extent so far

Let's quit the funny statements and concentrate upon facts gentlemen.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/apr/01/nato.georgia

Bush backs Ukraine and Georgia for Nato membership

US president George Bush. Photograph: Getty Images/Christopher Furlong Luke Harding in Moscow
Tuesday 1 April 2008 11.49 BST

George Bush this morning said he "strongly supported" Ukraine's attempt to join Nato, and warned he would not allow Russia to veto its membership bid.
Speaking in Kiev after a meeting with Ukraine's president, Viktor Yushchenko, the US president said both post-Soviet Ukraine and Georgia should be allowed to join the alliance – despite vehement objections from Russia.
In remarks likely to infuriate the Kremlin, Bush said Ukraine should be invited during this week's Nato summit in Bucharest to join Nato's membership action programme, a prelude to full membership.
He also said that there could be no deal with Moscow over the US administration's contentious plans to locate elements of its controversial missile defence system in eastern Europe.

"This is a misperception," Bush said after talks with in Kiev. "I strongly believe that Ukraine and Georgia should be given MAP [Membership Action Plans], and there are no tradeoffs - period."
Bush's comments came ahead of this week's Nato summit in Bucharest and talks between the US president and Russia's president, Vladimir Putin, on Sunday in the Russian Black Sea resort of Sochi.
The encounter is likely to be the last between the two leaders before Putin leaves office on May 7.
Putin is also attending tomorrow's Nato summit, and will address a closed meeting on Friday. The event is likely to be stormy.
Russia has made its opposition to Ukrainian and Georgian membership abundantly clear. In a briefing last night, the Kremlin's spokesman Dmitry Peskov said any attempt by Nato to expand further towards Russia's borders would upset the region's 'strategic stability'.
He also pointed out that most Ukrainians opposed Nato membership. "We don't believe that this policy of expanding Nato eastwards is playing a positive role in creating stability and strengthening democracy in the heart of Europe," he said.

Peskov hinted that Putin would not repeat his infamous speech in Munich last year, an outspoken attack on US power. "He is coming to Bucharest with a constructive approach, hoping for reciprocity," Peskov said.
This morning, Yushchenko expressed his gratitude to the US administration. "We have received full support from the United States," he said after a news conference with Bush, who is in Kiev for two days.
It is not clear whether Ukraine and Georgia will win approval for their membership bids this week. Germany and France are leading opposition from within the EU to such a move, arguing that it would needlessly antagonise Russia and provoke a new crisis between Russia and the west.
The Ukraine government's aspirations to secure a MAP face scepticism at home as well as resistance in Russia and from parts of western Europe.
In central Kiev, several hundred protesters defied a court ban and shouted anti-Nato slogans in Independence Square, the focal point of the 2004 pro-western "orange revolution" protests, which swept Yushchenko to power. A few thousand protesters were massed in the square today ahead of Bush's arrival.

For many Ukrainians, joining Nato is not a priority. Only 30% of respondents in the former Soviet state support the move.
Stephen Hadley, adviser to the National Security Council, told reporters on Air Force One en route to Kiev it was important to help both states to join Nato.

But the French prime minister, François Fillon, interviewed on a radio programme, said: "France will not give its green light to the entry of Ukraine and Georgia."

The United States of America wanted NATO to expand to Ukraine and Georgia - among others - at 2008 but Germany and France led a rebellion against that move which united most European countries.

An even more recent referendum in the Netherlands blocked an agreement between the E.U. and Ukraine.

Conclusion: It has not been the U.S.A. which denied protection to either Ukraine or Georgia, but Europe itself has "enlargement fatigue" for quite some time.

Trumps' words about the cost of "European defense against Russia" are very reasonable, simply because Russia has no intention to attack any E.U. state, for obvious reasons. Any reasonable person would notice that ALL of Russias' military engagements are to the south of Russia itself, NONE to the west of Russia.

The whole "defense shield" against Russia is based upon Polish insanity mixed with vengeance against Russia, something that ultimately resulted to the events in Ukraine...

...And Europe simply won't follow that path on its' own accord. The Obama administration was utterly silly to deploy troops to Eastern Europe for nothing, when it actually needs to concentrate as many troops as possible south of Russia, especially after the (inevitable) collapse of stability in Turkey. Yet all those goons in the NATO summit in Warsaw failed to take account of the facts on the ground.

Poland has been a constant liability to European security ever since it became the most fervent supporter of the Yankee invasion of Iraq in Europe, after Tony Blair himself. Poland should have been barred from meddling with European or NATO defense policy making since a long time ago.

Trump is also correct that NATO is utterly useless in the modern world. Russias' reaction in Ukraine and Georgia has been driven partially by the pointless expansion of NATO which Reagan once promised to Gorbachev it would never take place. Ultimately NATO did nothing and shall do nothing to stop Russia, while the E.U. has its' own defense dimension since quite a few years. Furthermore, what is utterly necessary is the expansion of the police forces at the expense of military forces because the modern threats to Europe are "asymmetrical" ones, plus stricter immigration control, and not conventional warfare. Even the sultan grasped that when he decided to launch his own coup...

O.K. fellas?
 
Furthermore, what is utterly necessary is the expansion of the police forces at the expense of military forces because the modern threats to Europe are "asymmetrical" ones, plus stricter immigration control, and not conventional warfare.

I would say this applies to the United States as well, honestly. I think it's very hard for some of us who grew up during the Cold War to move on from the old mindset of global chess with Russia, Russia's the enemy, etc. Just look at how many of our presidential candidates thought nothing of saying we should shoot down Russian planes in the middle east...
 
USA voters manage to put at finals the 2 most worst candidates,

i said i will not support someone, since I am not USA citizen,
but watching the facts, by these 2, USA is doomed,

cause one will bring inner wars, and the other massacres and chaos outside USA,
I am waiting to see if baba was right.
 
cause one will bring inner wars, and the other massacres and chaos outside USA

Equal chance for either of them to do both, IMO.
 
Yeah, easy to speak... from Greece.

edit: that was about the Russia not a threat, blah, blah.
 
Yeah, easy to speak... from Greece.

edit: that was about the Russia not a threat, blah, blah.

Yes, it's easy to speak from Greece.

Now you tell me, where had you been during the last 3 times Greece was at the brink of war with Turkey, whether you have suffered any genocides from the Russians as we have suffered from the Turks, and whether you have any territorial disputes with Russia like we have with Turkey, or even if any part of Latvia is under the Russian boot as 37% of Cyprus is under the boot of Turkey, and above all, inform me of the status of military service in Latvia and whether you still have conscription as Greece does and whether you have served 23 months in the Latvian military as I have served in the Greek military.

Because you are so smart, you figured out the Russians are after you...
 
Now, come on...this is what Democrat conventions are supposed to be like...I've always liked the theater. The music is great, too. :)

I still think that when push comes to shove 90% of them will vote for Hillary. How the 10% who will bolt will factor in, along with the "Never Trump" people, remains to be seen.

To some extent, the nationwide polls are irrelevant of course, given the electoral college system. It's the state by state polls that are important. The most significant are Florida, Ohio, Virginia, Colorado, maybe Pennsylvania. Guess where he's been holding rallies? That Pennsylvania is in play is huge. When was the last time Pennsylvania was red? Florida is essential, and with all the recent Puerto Rican migration I really think it's going to be a cliffhanger until the very end. I actually doubt he's going to get it. There have been a lot of demographic changes in Florida.

You can see how close the states are, here:
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/

He came out with another doozy...

"Russia, I hope you have those 33,000 e-mails." Now the Democrats are foaming at the mouth saying he's encouraging Russian espionage.

He shouldn't have said it, but to be fair, he isn't encouraging them to hack her server; in fact, it's already been wiped. I know it's a lawyerly distinction, but it's true nonetheless. The Democrat Party is also not the U.S. If someone indeed hacked it in the past and has the e-mails, I don't think they should be rewarded, but on the other hand I'd be lying if I didn't admit that I'd love to see them. If it happens and there's something terrible in them, all bets are off.

On another topic, the prosecutors dropped the charges against the so far untried police officers in the Freddie Gay case. They really had no choice since the Judge had dismissed so many of the prosecutions.

IMO, Prosecutor Moseby should be impeached and if that doesn't happen, she should be reported to the Bar Association for disciplinary action.
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/ma...i-miller-pretrial-motions-20160727-story.html

Not that it should matter, but here is the Judge.
http://www.northstarnewstoday.com/n...-freddie-gray-case-known-for-even-handedness/

Here he goes...let's talk about the convention...they didn't honor our police, and there were no flags...

It's his kind of town, Scranton, gritty, scrappy and blue collar.
 
Russia, I hope you have those 33,000 e-mails.

:LOL:

I think the "he's encouraging Russian espionage!" thing is a pretty pathetic attempt at distracting from their own obvious corruption.

"Who cares if we're liars, criminals and cheats...THE RUSSIANS OMG IVAN'S SPYING ON OUR SUBVERSIONS OF DEMOCRACY!"

Edit: oh, wow. Trump says the Russians probably have her deleted mail, so CNN's top headline right now?

[h=1]Donald Trump encourages Russia to hack Hillary Clinton[/h]
Our media are absolutely clownshoes.
 
Yeah, easy to speak... from Greece.

edit: that was about the Russia not a threat, blah, blah.

personally I prefer a stronger EU with strong trade agreements with Russia,
a common logic umbrella of fair treaties, than a stupid embargo uppon which both Greece and balts lose,
as long as EU is healthy and strong balts have nothing to fear,
NATO military existance is like scratch skin with hard nails,
In Greece we know it from Junda times,
 
Yes, it's easy to speak from Greece.

Now you tell me, where had you been during the last 3 times Greece was at the brink of war with Turkey, whether you have suffered any genocides from the Russians as we have suffered from the Turks, and whether you have any territorial disputes with Russia like we have with Turkey, or even if any part of Latvia is under the Russian boot as 37% of Cyprus is under the boot of Turkey, and above all, inform me of the status of military service in Latvia and whether you still have conscription as Greece does and whether you have served 23 months in the Latvian military as I have served in the Greek military.

Because you are so smart, you figured out the Russians are after you...
Well, I hope I have access to Western internet at the end of year 2017 to tell that you are right. Really, I try to admit when I am wrong.

I admire Greek fighting spirit and for 10 million nation to stand up against 80 millions is great. The last time was Imia/Kardak?

Even then I do not understand your point. Isolationist America if only in rhetoric is not good for either Greece or Latvia. They played a role in not escalating Imia/Kardak crysis.
"The immediate military threat was defused primarily by American officials—in particular, US envoy Richard Holbrooke, working by telephone with officials of both sides during the final hours of the crisis. The Greeks and Turks did not speak directly to one another, but were responsive to Washington's assistance as an informal intermediary. Agreement was given by both sides to the United States to return to the "status quo ante"—i.e., differing views on sovereignty and no military forces on the islets. Greek and Turkish officials provided assurances to the United States that their military forces on and arrayed around the islets would be removed, with the U.S. agreeing to monitor the withdrawal.[8] While US engagement was instrumental in defusing the crisis, the fundamental territorial issue has remained unresolved since that time."

Now imagine Erdogan backed by Putin (https://themoscowtimes.com/articles/putin-and-erdogan-the-start-of-a-beautiful-friendship-54742) trying a provocation in Aegean.
Clinton would react in predictable US manner.
How would Trump react? Would he care of some distant tiny island issue?
 
Well, I hope I have access to Western internet at the end of year 2017 to tell that you are right. Really, I try to admit when I am wrong.

I admire Greek fighting spirit and for 10 million nation to stand up against 80 millions is great. The last time was Imia/Kardak?

Even then I do not understand your point. Isolationist America if only in rhetoric is not good for either Greece or Latvia. They played a role in not escalating Imia/Kardak crysis.
"The immediate military threat was defused primarily by American officials—in particular, US envoy Richard Holbrooke, working by telephone with officials of both sides during the final hours of the crisis. The Greeks and Turks did not speak directly to one another, but were responsive to Washington's assistance as an informal intermediary. Agreement was given by both sides to the United States to return to the "status quo ante"—i.e., differing views on sovereignty and no military forces on the islets. Greek and Turkish officials provided assurances to the United States that their military forces on and arrayed around the islets would be removed, with the U.S. agreeing to monitor the withdrawal.[8] While US engagement was instrumental in defusing the crisis, the fundamental territorial issue has remained unresolved since that time."

Now imagine Erdogan backed by Putin (https://themoscowtimes.com/articles/putin-and-erdogan-the-start-of-a-beautiful-friendship-54742) trying a provocation in Aegean.
Clinton would react in predictable US manner.
How would Trump react? Would he care of some distant tiny island issue?

Excellent points, Arvistro, and you're indeed a very fair and balanced poster. I enjoy your posts very much.
 
They've been listening to the criticism: Invocation which mentions the gunning down of the police, Presenting of the Colors, The Pledge of Allegiance, and The Star Spangled Banner. Nice touch...an eleven year old Hispanic kid singing.

Oh dear, almost no cheers at the end. Maybe it would have been better not to do it. Did someone mention "tone deaf"?

Switched over to the Trump rally: He referenced all the hub bub over his comments about the Russians and the e-mails, going into a rif about how he was watching the news when it first broke, and heard some newscaster say...Russia hacked the Democrats...it must be Trump too, or something like that. " I was half asleep because this guy is like the most boring guy in the world, but I jumped up and said what the hell did I do now?" He then said the guy is as much of a pathological liar as Jon Lovitz playing The Pathological Liar on Saturday Night Live.

See, this is the problem for people like me who are afraid he'll win...he's quick and he's funny and he has his finger on the pulse of American media.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkYNBwCEeH4

Why did we have to wind up with these two at the end of the day? I've got agita.

Oh, and somebody tell David Gergen it's time to hang up his spurs. The man's been wrong, by my estimation, about absolutely everything, and yet CNN keeps paying him to appear. He famously said, remember, that Clinton would be removed from office for lying under oath about his sexual peccadillos. Now he's saying this quip of Donald's will sink him. Er...I'm thinking not. Plus, he's congratulating the Democrats that viewership for the first two nights is bigger than the Republican's had. God, David, I'm watching most of it, but for the music; it's like a Concert for America. You know what it would normally cost to watch all these people?

Why are so may stupid, clueless people paid to give their opinions on TV?
 
Well, I hope I have access to Western internet at the end of year 2017 to tell that you are right. Really, I try to admit when I am wrong.

I admire Greek fighting spirit and for 10 million nation to stand up against 80 millions is great. The last time was Imia/Kardak?

Even then I do not understand your point. Isolationist America if only in rhetoric is not good for either Greece or Latvia. They played a role in not escalating Imia/Kardak crysis.
"The immediate military threat was defused primarily by American officials—in particular, US envoy Richard Holbrooke, working by telephone with officials of both sides during the final hours of the crisis. The Greeks and Turks did not speak directly to one another, but were responsive to Washington's assistance as an informal intermediary. Agreement was given by both sides to the United States to return to the "status quo ante"—i.e., differing views on sovereignty and no military forces on the islets. Greek and Turkish officials provided assurances to the United States that their military forces on and arrayed around the islets would be removed, with the U.S. agreeing to monitor the withdrawal.[8] While US engagement was instrumental in defusing the crisis, the fundamental territorial issue has remained unresolved since that time."

Now imagine Erdogan backed by Putin (https://themoscowtimes.com/articles/putin-and-erdogan-the-start-of-a-beautiful-friendship-54742) trying a provocation in Aegean.
Clinton would react in predictable US manner.
How would Trump react? Would he care of some distant tiny island issue?

I cannot imagine Erdogan backed by Putin in any universe, this one or a parallel one. Russia has been constantly on the Greek side on virtually every issue since it was Soviet Union and even earlier, while Greece and Russia have a very long relationship in the past, Russia was instrumental at securing the Greek independence against the Ottoman empire in the early 19th century, the first Greek prime minister was the foreign minister of Russia who also helped draft the Swiss constitution.

The U.S. of A. has taken a VERY LONG TIME tolerating the mishaps of Turkey, and even today it remains a member of NATO. Meanwhile the EU is supposed to defend European territory just as NATO does, which means that the EU army (which was opposed by Britain until now) is a far better alternative to NATO.

Meanwhile, if you want to know Trumps' opinion on Turkey, why don't you just listen to him personally. (after 2:03):


Did I mention that Erdogan is an Islamist and everyone from Putin to Trump is converging on them as targets of their rhetoric, if not military actions?

Did I mention that Erdogan supported ISIS, colluded with Saudi Arabia and Qatar to destroy Syria and so on?

Do I need to explain to you that Clinton makes decisions based upon the funds received by the Clinton foundation, and that the Clinton foundation is heavily financed by the Muslim states while Turkey spends a hell lot more for lobbying than Greece shall ever do?

P.S.

I am sorry if the Russians cut off your internet connection, but do me a favor, don't make it an issue of importance....
 
Well, I hope I have access to Western internet at the end of year 2017 to tell that you are right. Really, I try to admit when I am wrong.

I admire Greek fighting spirit and for 10 million nation to stand up against 80 millions is great. The last time was Imia/Kardak?

Even then I do not understand your point. Isolationist America if only in rhetoric is not good for either Greece or Latvia. They played a role in not escalating Imia/Kardak crysis.
"The immediate military threat was defused primarily by American officials—in particular, US envoy Richard Holbrooke, working by telephone with officials of both sides during the final hours of the crisis. The Greeks and Turks did not speak directly to one another, but were responsive to Washington's assistance as an informal intermediary. Agreement was given by both sides to the United States to return to the "status quo ante"—i.e., differing views on sovereignty and no military forces on the islets. Greek and Turkish officials provided assurances to the United States that their military forces on and arrayed around the islets would be removed, with the U.S. agreeing to monitor the withdrawal.[8] While US engagement was instrumental in defusing the crisis, the fundamental territorial issue has remained unresolved since that time."

Now imagine Erdogan backed by Putin (https://themoscowtimes.com/articles/putin-and-erdogan-the-start-of-a-beautiful-friendship-54742) trying a provocation in Aegean.
Clinton would react in predictable US manner.
How would Trump react? Would he care of some distant tiny island issue?

the Imia-kardak case was a setup case,
every year fighting airplanes drop at sea,
I served at marines special forces,
believe me every time Turks had a military exercise, I was spitting rust sleeping at open sea ships, like this one LST-1076 for weeks, 6 persons at a troop chamber 3,2 x 2,2 x 3,2 m and tooth brush and shave with salt water, and knowing that at my troop/bed, dead corpses from vietnam were transfered.
but fear is not a good advisor, fear shows weakness,
you must be always prepaired for war, but always give your best shelf at diplomacy and treaties first, commerce is no 1,

Imia was a set case, for inner Turkey public-media consume.
only we lost some good and honoured man there by the stupidity of politicians,
if you know the story well Yavuz would be rust at the bottom today,

Putin is not Stupid,
he wont backed neither Turkey, neither Greece, do not hear what they say,

as also is not stupid to take or enter baltic lands,
just give him fair treaty, and prepair for war,
Russia today has the both exits she wants, to Baltic sea, and to Black sea,
the only exit she lust for, is the forbiden one, the mediterrenean sea, although she controls Lattakeia,

after finish my military obligations I faced the other face of Nato, the good one,
I worked as scientific advisor for 'big Nato plans' such as constructions in countries that needed help,
that is the other face of Nato, the good one, roads, hospitals, powerplants etc etc are build by Nato designers, under umbrella of donations or straight use or developement plants,

but Nato has also other face, the ugly one, like Jundas, economical killers, assasins, media control, etc etc.



that happened at end of April 2016


want more?
 
I cannot imagine Erdogan backed by Putin in any universe, this one or a parallel one. Russia has been constantly on the Greek side on virtually every issue since it was Soviet Union and even earlier, while Greece and Russia have a very long relationship in the past, Russia was instrumental at securing the Greek independence against the Ottoman empire in the early 19th century, the first Greek prime minister was the foreign minister of Russia who also helped draft the Swiss constitution.

The U.S. of A. has taken a VERY LONG TIME tolerating the mishaps of Turkey, and even today it remains a member of NATO. Meanwhile the EU is supposed to defend European territory just as NATO does, which means that the EU army (which was opposed by Britain until now) is a far better alternative to NATO.

Meanwhile, if you want to know Trumps' opinion on Turkey, why don't you just listen to him personally. (after 2:03):


Did I mention that Erdogan is an Islamist and everyone from Putin to Trump is converging on them as targets of their rhetoric, if not military actions?

Did I mention that Erdogan supported ISIS, colluded with Saudi Arabia and Qatar to destroy Syria and so on?

Do I need to explain to you that Clinton makes decisions based upon the funds received by the Clinton foundation, and that the Clinton foundation is heavily financed by the Muslim states while Turkey spends a hell lot more for lobbying than Greece shall ever do?

P.S.

I am sorry if the Russians cut off your internet connection, but do me a favor, don't make it an issue of importance....
I'm wondering why you go to such great lengths to defend Russia and Putin. Yes, what the American government has done is wrong on many levels, but can't we criticize both? Every time someone criticizes Putin, this crowd will accuse them of distracting from the American government's corruption. Also posting videos from Alex Jones probably doesn't leave the best impression online.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

This thread has been viewed 704334 times.

Back
Top