• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

CNN Poll: Trump Moves Ahead of Clinton

84% of Republicans support Trump as of two weeks ago versus 75% the previous cycle. I am pointing out a poll that similarly shows the death of the nevertrump crusade that was discussed on the radio this morning.

Okay, but who are these big name #nevertrumpers who are now supporting Trump?
 
Rand Paul, Rick Perry and most recently Mark Levin

That's funny. I don't recall Perry and Paul ever being #nevertrumpers. And I also recall them endorsing Trump many months ago, well before the convention.

Don't know anything about Mark Levin.
 
This is interesting.
Poll: Trump Leads Clinton Among Military and Veteran Voters - NBC News

Mitt Romney had the endorsement of 500 generals.

More good news for Trump as it not only shows increased support, but also that the military as a whole does not view him as being dangerously erratic.
Mitt Romney had the endorsement of 500 generals.

500 for Romney, 88 for Trump and 95 for Clinton. The end result of the math is the increasing politicalization of a traditionally a-political military.
I would support adopting a regulation where retired senior officers (O-7 (maybe even O-6) and higher) cannot directly endorse political candidates.

Such retired officers would still have their First Amendment rights to publically voice disagreement with the proposed policies of candidate "C", but would not be able to give direct endorsements to his or her opponent.
 
I'm curious. What does it mean when it says, "WIKILEAKS:More Clinton Leaks Coming Soon?"
 
I'm curious. What does it mean when it says, "WIKILEAKS:More Clinton Leaks Coming Soon?"

There are a few issues that are still pending.
1. The release of the training records on classified information from Clinton and her senior staff.
2. The deposed questions for Clinton from Judicial Watch.
3. The release of the 14,900 deleted emails that the FBI recovered from her server.
4. The release of her schedule to AP. The State Department promised to release that before the election. I suspect they will try to delay in court at the last minute.
5. Wikileaks, like you mentioned. I am conflicted on this one. It gives us some kind of transparency that we wouldn't have otherwise but he doesn't redact information and that can get people killed and I don't agree with releasing personal information.
 
Well, Madame danareah, why not do us all a favor and give us Saturdays lottery numbers, will you?

That will cost you more than you can afford, but for a limited time, I have a special offer for you. For only $99.95 (plus tax, title, and whatever else I can think of to throw in there) I will give you last week's lottery numbers. They are guaranteed to be good for last week or your money back. :mrgreen:
 
There are a few issues that are still pending.
1. The release of the training records on classified information from Clinton and her senior staff.
2. The deposed questions for Clinton from Judicial Watch.
3. The release of the 14,900 deleted emails that the FBI recovered from her server.
4. The release of her schedule to AP. The State Department promised to release that before the election. I suspect they will try to delay in court at the last minute.
5. Wikileaks, like you mentioned. I am conflicted on this one. It gives us some kind of transparency that we wouldn't have otherwise but he doesn't redact information and that can get people killed and I don't agree with releasing personal information.

Don't forget about any national secrets that Trump can get the Russians to steal. :mrgreen:
 
Don't forget about any national secrets that Trump can get the Russians to steal. :mrgreen:

According to Clinton, the material in question is all about yoga lessons and shopping lists. Thus, no national secrets to steal.
 
Everyone thinks that Trump will do well in the debates, everyone thinks he will have a Ronald Reagan moment during them. Though I haven't seen this capacity from him, he's either absent from them or rather mellow. Hillary's people are going on the offensive for the first time in the debates. They are training her to attack, attack, attack and to get under his skin. If the Benghazi hearings prove anything, it's Hillary knows how to debate, hold her ground, and act dumb. I mean she outsmarted EVERY house Republican AND for all intents and purposes, the FBI! If Hillary catches Trump in just one of his Emotional conspiracy-like tirades. I consider it game over for Trump.

That's actually a pretty good analysis.
 
That's funny. I don't recall Perry and Paul ever being #nevertrumpers. And I also recall them endorsing Trump many months ago, well before the convention.

Don't know anything about Mark Levin.

Paul and Perry were nevertrump, but Perry switched when he thought he might take Cruz's Senate seat. Either way I have shown you that the nevertrump movement is dying on the vine. You had a good run, all that is left is the whining.

And as I have said many times, I am not a Trump guy, I'm just not an anti-trump ideologue either.
 
Everyone thinks that Trump will do well in the debates, everyone thinks he will have a Ronald Reagan moment during them. Though I haven't seen this capacity from him, he's either absent from them or rather mellow. Hillary's people are going on the offensive for the first time in the debates. They are training her to attack, attack, attack and to get under his skin. If the Benghazi hearings prove anything, it's Hillary knows how to debate, hold her ground, and act dumb. I mean she outsmarted EVERY house Republican AND for all intents and purposes, the FBI! If Hillary catches Trump in just one of his Emotional conspiracy-like tirades. I consider it game over for Trump.

He'll have a hard time getting a word in through all the coughing, anyway.
 
If by "most" you mean move on, Geo Soros, Hillary loving sycophants, then you are right...Hell, Hillary may not make it to the election, she's been having more and more trouble with that cough...

Sent from my LGLS991 using Tapatalk

I call her Hacking Hillary.
 
He'll have a hard time getting a word in through all the coughing, anyway.


He'll probably just flail his little hands and call her names instead of debating the issues.
 
Wikileaks, like you mentioned. I am conflicted on this one. It gives us some kind of transparency that we wouldn't have otherwise but he doesn't redact information and that can get people killed and I don't agree with releasing personal information.

The real question is why people like Sean Hannity would support Julian Assange.

I thought Hannity was a big proponent of keeping our soldiers/allies safe.
 
He'll probably just flail his little hands and call her names instead of debating the issues.

Hard to find ground to debate when your opponent is hacking up a lung.
 
The real question is why people like Sean Hannity would support Julian Assange.

I thought Hannity was a big proponent of keeping our soldiers/allies safe.

A few years ago, I wanted him shot. Then hung for releasing national security secrets.

Now, since his releases were somewhat "private sector" and helping dig the truth out of the Clinton phenomenon, he's a hero.

So I guess I'm a hypocrite with a higher purpose.
 
Paul and Perry were nevertrump, but Perry switched when he thought he might take Cruz's Senate seat. Either way I have shown you that the nevertrump movement is dying on the vine. You had a good run, all that is left is the whining.

And as I have said many times, I am not a Trump guy, I'm just not an anti-trump ideologue either.

Actually, you didn't show anyone how the #nevertrump movement is dying on the vine. You mentioned two names, which I had to correct you on, and who you now even admit were not #nevertrumpers. But if it makes you feel better pretending you proved something, then by all means, keep pretending. I'm not an anti-Trump ideologue either. But I'm also not disingenuous, and don't make claims that aren't true or pretend I posted evidence of.
 
Don't forget about any national secrets that Trump can get the Russians to steal. :mrgreen:

I don't think the Russians are releasing anything. It doesn't make any sense. Since the leaks cyber security has tightened making it harder to hack any of the computers in the US Govt. They already had the passwords so why expose that fact and have all that information hidden again? They could have milked those passwords forever. Now that cow is dead and they have to start all over again. Putin is way smarter than that. He could have used all that kind of info to blackmail any number of people in govt positions. I think it is an individual.

The idea that Trump got the Russians to steal that info is a far reach, like to the sun kind of far.
 
The real question is why people like Sean Hannity would support Julian Assange.

I thought Hannity was a big proponent of keeping our soldiers/allies safe.

I guess you know more about Hannity than I do. How does he fit into this thread?
 
Last edited:
I'm curious. What does it mean when it says, "WIKILEAKS:More Clinton Leaks Coming Soon?"

He said he is going to release the docs in batches. He will start in September according to his last statement.
 
He said he is going to release the docs in batches. He will start in September according to his last statement.

Kinda makes me feel like I did when I was a kid and Mom brought home the Christmas Advent Calendar.
 
Kinda makes me feel like I did when I was a kid and Mom brought home the Christmas Advent Calendar.

I don't want them released. He doesn't redact anything.
 
Back
Top Bottom