When Hilary Wins, How Will it Affect Your Life?

[rkelly110]

Presidents are usually figure heads and aren't suppose to do much.

Congress has control of the purse strings. If you have a problem with our debt, look there. Some senate/ house races
are up for grabs. While most are interested in the big race, it's actually the little races that matter.

If your person who's running is advertising undoing everything Obama has done, he's an obstructionist.
If you have an incumbent running who signed a pledge, he's an obstructionist.

Congress is suppose to be like a marriage. Both are to work together for the good of the family. If one
says it's my way or the highway, that marriage will fail. I don't want our country to fail, do you?

I'm tired of our congress bickering and not doing anything. I'll bet most here are. If you are, vote accordingly.

[brooks85]

^you're tired of it because you have admitted you're a sheep so it doesn't matter that any intelligent person would do anything they could to stop obama's terrible changes for the country because you'd toe the line either way sheepy

If Trump wins, it won't affect me in the least. I'm not a 1%'er, I'm not gay, I'm not a minority, I'm not a woman, I'm not an immigrant, therefore, I won't be subject to Trumps hatred towards all things not white men. But this is beside the point

So I ask any of you, if Hilary wins, practically speaking, hows it really going to affect you personally? I can't think of one negative way Clinton will impact any of our lives, if she wins, I can't think of any way my life will change either. She will howevere nominate a much more liveral justice to the SCOTUS which Im a big fan of, but probably won't touch my life unless they rule on unions, but they'd be a pro-union panel

Please, give me an example, good or bad

everyone take notice of how a liberal sheep thinks. It is easy to trick them when they only think about what is right in front of their face. They have absolutely no intellectual capability to think beyond the first affect of something.


If you can't see how hillary will be negative for this country considering she will be 8 more years of the worst president this country has ever seen then calling you an idiot is accurate.

[irish1]

You sound very stupid. The law that you want to apply to clinton was passed under carter. Reagan both bushes and clinton could of got rid of that law. Also I had the business thru hud. in swest ohio and n ky under bush so I know what the hell I'm talking about.

But the Clintons and many other Democrats apparently believed such economic nonsense. To remedy the alleged racism at banks, they strengthened the "anti-redlining" regulations of the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), which had originally been passed during the Carter years, and they instituted an aggressive campaign that forced lenders to abandon their established underwriting criteria and drastically lower their standards to accommodate minorities who would not otherwise qualify for a home loan.
Key figures in the matter were Attorney General Janet Reno and her Deputy, none other than Eric Holder. They aggressively intimidated banks with threats of prosecution, lawsuits, stiff fines, and regulatory roadblocks to expansion and mergers. They paid little attention to actual lending practices and underwriting criteria, focusing instead on the end results in terms of percentages of minority loans approved. It mattered not whether the lenders were actually discriminating on the basis of race or whether minorities in general simply had worse credit histories (statistics show that they do). It was classic "affirmative action" for home loans.
Reno aggressively prosecuted several banks for "racist" lending practices, and she also encouraged private lawsuits against banks. One such lawsuit was filed against Citibank with back-bench support from a little-known community organizer and civil-rights lawyer named Barack Obama. Other government agencies also embarked on witch-hunts, including the Comptroller of Currency, the President's Fair Housing Council, and the Inter-agency Task Force on Fair Lending, the latter two having been set up by the Clinton administration specifically to harass banks. They even pressured some banks to open offices in dangerous neighborhoods.

[irish1]

There's some proof that clinton took it upon himself and caused a housing crisis we would feel for years down the line!!! AFFIRMATIVE ACTION FOR HOME LOANS.

[brooks85]

^omfg lol

I go away for a few days and chico thinks he can keep lying.




Originally Posted by chico2663
You sound very stupid. The law that you want to apply to clinton was passed under carter. Reagan both bushes and clinton could of got rid of that law. Also I had the business thru hud. in swest ohio and n ky under bush so I know what the hell I'm talking about.






Clinton changed it and made it FAR worse than carter. You've already been shown this so cut the crap little one.


and no, you don't know what you're talking about. Based on your post history only an idiot or a new poster would believe you know what you're talking about.

[Optional]

Presidents are usually figure heads and aren't suppose to do much.

Congress has control of the purse strings. If you have a problem with our debt, look there. Some senate/ house races
are up for grabs. While most are interested in the big race, it's actually the little races that matter.

If your person who's running is advertising undoing everything Obama has done, he's an obstructionist.
If you have an incumbent running who signed a pledge, he's an obstructionist.

Congress is suppose to be like a marriage. Both are to work together for the good of the family. If one
says it's my way or the highway, that marriage will fail. I don't want our country to fail, do you?

I'm tired of our congress bickering and not doing anything. I'll bet most here are. If you are, vote accordingly.

^you're tired of it because you have admitted you're a sheep so it doesn't matter that any intelligent person would do anything they could to stop obama's terrible changes for the country because you'd toe the line either way sheepy

I wonder what percentage of your posts talk about how unintelligent you deem the other person to be as opposed to actually addressing the subject at all? Have to be way over 50% at a guess.

Are you so brainwashed and rusted onto an ideology that you are unable to address a valid point by your 'enemy' ever? Do you see zero value in what rkelly said there? Do you disagree with him? Or maybe you're just not really sharp enough to come up with a worthwhile response so go with the same old 'attack/brag' about how intelligent you are. (-1000)

Seems you are one of the main drones around here and in my opinion that makes your opinion on anything about as useful as rocks. Honestly, you really do seem quite ignorant and a little bit below average on the IQ scale yourself. Maybe that's why you are so worried about intelligence in general? You fear that you aren't quite as bright as you would like to be?

Always trying to shut people down as too dumb is a terrible personality trait and not at all valid anyway. You don't need to be a brain surgeon or genius to have or deserve an opinion in this world. Which is very lucky for you even though you obviously don't realize it.

[khicks26]

I wonder what percentage of your posts talk about how unintelligent you deem the other person to be as opposed to actually addressing the subject at all? Have to be way over 50% at a guess.

Are you so brainwashed and rusted onto an ideology that you are unable to address a valid point by your 'enemy' ever? Do you see zero value in what rkelly said there? Do you disagree with him? Or maybe you're just not really sharp enough to come up with a worthwhile response so go with the same old 'attack/brag' about how intelligent you are. (-1000)

Seems you are one of the main drones around here and in my opinion that makes your opinion on anything about as useful as rocks. Honestly, you really do seem quite ignorant and a little bit below average on the IQ scale yourself. Maybe that's why you are so worried about intelligence in general? You fear that you aren't quite as bright as you would like to be?

Always trying to shut people down as too dumb is a terrible personality trait and not at all valid anyway. You don't need to be a brain surgeon or genius to have or deserve an opinion in this world. Which is very lucky for you even though you obviously don't realize it.

[grease lightnin]

I wonder what percentage of your posts talk about how unintelligent you deem the other person to be as opposed to actually addressing the subject at all? Have to be way over 50% at a guess.

Are you so brainwashed and rusted onto an ideology that you are unable to address a valid point by your 'enemy' ever? Do you see zero value in what rkelly said there? Do you disagree with him? Or maybe you're just not really sharp enough to come up with a worthwhile response so go with the same old 'attack/brag' about how intelligent you are. (-1000)

Seems you are one of the main drones around here and in my opinion that makes your opinion on anything about as useful as rocks. Honestly, you really do seem quite ignorant and a little bit below average on the IQ scale yourself. Maybe that's why you are so worried about intelligence in general? You fear that you aren't quite as bright as you would like to be?

Always trying to shut people down as too dumb is a terrible personality trait and not at all valid anyway. You don't need to be a brain surgeon or genius to have or deserve an opinion in this world. Which is very lucky for you even though you obviously don't realize it.

Bravo!!

[brooks85]

^of course this moron likes it optional. Another clue to the burning ship you just hopped on.

Look how many posts I have, I don't call people idiots until they earn it. Chicken little up there isn't an idiot like rkelly or khicks, he is just petulant and won't accept he is emotional even though he already admitted it in another post lol. I could tell him the sky was blue and he wouldn't agree. That is where I've trapped him. Same hole khicks and rkelly are in, just not as deep yet.

I wonder what percentage of your posts talk about how unintelligent you deem the other person to be as opposed to actually addressing the subject at all? Have to be way over 50% at a guess.

Are you so brainwashed and rusted onto an ideology that you are unable to address a valid point by your 'enemy' ever? Do you see zero value in what rkelly said there? Do you disagree with him? Or maybe you're just not really sharp enough to come up with a worthwhile response so go with the same old 'attack/brag' about how intelligent you are. (-1000)

Seems you are one of the main drones around here and in my opinion that makes your opinion on anything about as useful as rocks. Honestly, you really do seem quite ignorant and a little bit below average on the IQ scale yourself. Maybe that's why you are so worried about intelligence in general? You fear that you aren't quite as bright as you would like to be?

Always trying to shut people down as too dumb is a terrible personality trait and not at all valid anyway. You don't need to be a brain surgeon or genius to have or deserve an opinion in this world. Which is very lucky for you even though you obviously don't realize it.

I'd say it's easily over 80% now.



When you have spent as much time proving rkelly wrong as I have and even forced him to admit that he is a sheep, uses "my truths(can't google it because he literally made it up to save himself from admitting he is a liar)" and often doesn't know what he is talking about you stop wasting the time. Facts since you're clearly ignorant to them.


So now you have to ask yourself if you want to defend known idiots like rkelly, khicks, d2bet, kraken, dante, greget and whoever else I'm missing?




no you don't. Which is why when I use facts to prove them wrong then they use their alice-in-wonderland logic to keep going I can rightfully call them an idiot.



take your foot out of your mouth now optional, we will forget this slip up unless you want to team up with those idiots.

[Optional]

I'd say it's easily over 80% now.



When you have spent as much time proving rkelly wrong as I have and even forced him to admit that he is a sheep, uses "my truths(can't google it because he literally made it up to save himself from admitting he is a liar)" and often doesn't know what he is talking about you stop wasting the time. Facts since you're clearly ignorant to them.


So now you have to ask yourself if you want to defend known idiots like rkelly, khicks, d2bet, kraken, dante, greget and whoever else I'm missing?




no you don't. Which is why when I use facts to prove them wrong then they use their alice-in-wonderland logic to keep going I can rightfully call them an idiot.



take your foot out of your mouth now optional, we will forget this slip up unless you want to team up with those idiots.

I don't see where you proved him wrong this time.

Personally I thought he made an interesting point in a way I had not heard before.

Do you really think he was wrong about the arms of govt working together like a marriage, or failing?

I'm genuinely interested in why, if you think it's better that one house battles the other.

[rkelly110]

Reread Optional's post, rocks for brains. Better yet, show us these facts, logics and math you spew with each post
you make. I already schooled you in math that you so reluctantly agreed to in your own little way. If your idea of
math is 10/2=5, that shows all you need to be a time thieving state worker.

[khicks26]

I'd say it's easily over 80% now.



When you have spent as much time proving rkelly wrong as I have and even forced him to admit that he is a sheep, uses "my truths(can't google it because he literally made it up to save himself from admitting he is a liar)" and often doesn't know what he is talking about you stop wasting the time. Facts since you're clearly ignorant to them.


So now you have to ask yourself if you want to defend known idiots like rkelly, khicks, d2bet, kraken, dante, greget and whoever else I'm missing?




no you don't. Which is why when I use facts to prove them wrong then they use their alice-in-wonderland logic to keep going I can rightfully call them an idiot.



take your foot out of your mouth now optional, we will forget this slip up unless you want to team up with those idiots.

Let me translate Optional's post for you. I think he was a little to eloquent in his wording.

The world does not revolve around your ass & your opinion is not fact. So quit being a hateful jerk face to everyone & people will take you more seriously. Talk to people, not at them.


'attack/brag' That is so you brooks LOL

[brooks85]

I don't see where you proved him wrong this time.

Personally I thought he made an interesting point in a way I had not heard before.

Do you really think he was wrong about the arms of govt working together like a marriage, or failing?

I'm genuinely interested in why, if you think it's better that one house battles the other.

that is why it is called post history. And he didn't make a point, not the post I pointed to so no idea what you're talking about. If it is new to you then you should be grateful I stopped you from believing his lies.




There is a very, very good reason why Obama is getting no help no should he. And rkelly's lie about bills on his desk as just that, lies. But go ahead, keep believing a known liar.

[ByeShea]

Oh, this fight again.

Whatever it takes to divert attention away from the giant Hillary fail.

[khicks26]

Old Brooky gone for a few days & gets sliced diced & severed in the first few hours of his return. LOL

[brooks85]

Old Brooky gone for a few days & gets sliced diced & severed in the first few hours of his return. LOL

lol the psyche of yours still saying things it "needs" to be true. Clockwork.

[khicks26]

lol the psyche of yours still saying things it "needs" to be true. Clockwork.

Now he's going into denial mode. Your to funny brooks.

[Optional]

that is why it is called post history. And he didn't make a point, not the post I pointed too so no idea what you're talking about. If it is new to you then you should be grateful I stopped you from believing his lies.




There is a very, very good reason why Obama is getting no help no should he. And rkelly's lie about bills on his desk as just that, lies. But go ahead, keep believing a known liar.

I didn't 'believe' him. Just thought the point was interesting.

Almost there with a real discussion. What's the good reason?

[brooks85]

I didn't 'believe' him. Just thought the point was interesting.

Almost there with a real discussion. What's the good reason?

tyranny


sneaking in after midnight to pass a law more than half the country didn't want(not exaggerating at all). And, now with hindsight we now for a fact the law is garbage. Even nancy pelosi admitted we have to pass the law to find out what is in it. Well, it's bad.

[brooks85]

Now he's going into denial mode. Your to funny brooks.

that doesn't even make sense alice lol


there was nothing for me to deny, just your alice-in-wonderland logic I'm pointing out.

[grease lightnin]

I could tell him the sky was blue and he wouldn't agree.
.

Guy is AGAIN stealing quips previously used against him. He has no shame.

He is a TROLL folks. Don't take him seriously

[khicks26]

that doesn't even make sense alice lol


there was nothing for me to deny, just your alice-in-wonderland logic I'm pointing out.

All I can say is 'attack/brag. To funny. Have a good day brooks.

[brooks85]

I know it is all you can say alice.

^of course this moron likes it optional. Another clue to the burning ship you just hopped on.

Look how many posts I have, I don't call people idiots until they earn it. Chicken little up there isn't an idiot like rkelly or khicks, he is just petulant and won't accept he is emotional even though he already admitted it in another post lol. I could tell him the sky was blue and he wouldn't agree. That is where I've trapped him. Same hole khicks and rkelly are in, just not as deep yet.





.

lol case in point. You can clearly tell how desperate he is.




yes, sky is blue is someone elses quip. Christ you're deseprate grease. Oh, and you didn't put me on ignore? lol

[Optional]

tyranny


sneaking in after midnight to pass a law more than half the country didn't want(not exaggerating at all). And, now with hindsight we now for a fact the law is garbage. Even nancy pelosi admitted we have to pass the law to find out what is in it. Well, it's bad.

Agree, that's bad for democracy too.

But a Pres doing that is a symptom of the 'marriage' not working in the first place.

Whether we get Trump or Clinton it can't be good for America if the new Pres is not allowed to enact the policies they want.

Personally, I think if Trump wins and really tries to build a wall, there is a million and one sensible reasons for that to be obstructed... but still, he would have such a strong mandate for it I think it is anti-democracy and close to treason to block that for any reason.

[grease lightnin]

I know it is all you can say alice.





lol case in point. You can clearly tell how desperate he is.




yes, sky is blue is someone elses quip. Christ you're deseprate grease. Oh, and you didn't put me on ignore? lol

Desperate for what? I am here for entertainment. What you think has absolutely zero effect on my life.

One of the last things I said to you was you finally admitted the sky was blue.

No, I didn't put you on ignore, just decided not to waste my time with you. And I am doing a great job at that, aren't I?

[brooks85]

Agree, that's bad for democracy too.

But a Pres doing that is a symptom of the 'marriage' not working in the first place.

Whether we get Trump or Clinton it can't be good for America if the new Pres is not allowed to enact the policies they want.

Personally, I think if Trump wins and really tries to build a wall, there is a million and one sensible reasons for that to be obstructed... but still, he would have such a strong mandate for it I think it is anti-democracy and close to treason to block that for any reason.

a president/party has never done anything like that before in recent history.. oh wait, yes they did when they lied to the country and reagan about securing the border.


Give me one good reason why a wall should be obstructed? Just one good reason.

Also, the president does not get to enact policies he/she wants. That is not how it works nor should it work that way as we have seen with Obama. No change is often better than forcing change so obstructionists for president's like obama is exactly what any rational citizen would want. Obama has literally been one of the worst presidents in history, the most obviously, so hillary getting her way would only further the damage.



Your logic that a president's policy should be supported simply because they are a president is extremely illogical. Now factor in Obama and it is obvious that thought process is dangerously wrong.

[Greget]

a president/party has never done anything like that before in recent history.. oh wait, yes they did when they lied to the country and reagan about securing the border.


Give me one good reason why a wall should be obstructed? Just one good reason.

Also, the president does not get to enact policies he/she wants. That is not how it works nor should it work that way as we have seen with Obama. No change is often better than forcing change so obstructionists for president's like obama is exactly what any rational citizen would want. Obama has literally been one of the worst presidents in history, the most obviously, so hillary getting her way would only further the damage.

Because its a waste of money and barely 30% of the population even wants it. 60% are outright against it. But if you live in a bubble you may not know this.

http://dailycaller.com/2016/04/02/poll-60-percent-of-americans-dont-want-donald-trumps-wall/

[brooks85]

Because its a waste of money and barely 30% of the population even wants it. 60% are outright against it. But if you live in a bubble you may not know this.

http://dailycaller.com/2016/04/02/po...d-trumps-wall/

lol greget still showing polls, I enjoy your clown show.

"The latest national survey by Pew Research Center, conducted March 17-27 among 2,254 adults, including 1,787 registered voters,"


you remind me of dante so much. How ignorant and sheepish you are.

[Greget]

There's some proof that clinton took it upon himself and caused a housing crisis we would feel for years down the line!!! AFFIRMATIVE ACTION FOR HOME LOANS.

No. There is no proof. That racist line of "reasoning" has been debunked over and over. Banks made risky loans because they were profitable and there was no regulation in place to prevent them. It is a banks responsibility to advise people on appropriate loans. If I hire someone to build me a wall and it falls down, its not my fault I didn't double check the builder's work.

Today there is regulation and the same behavior no longer takes place because of Obama and Financial Regulations passed in the wake of the Republican Great Recession, including bank stress tests.

[Greget]

lol greget still showing polls, I enjoy your clown show.

"The latest national survey by Pew Research Center, conducted March 17-27 among 2,254 adults, including 1,787 registered voters,"


you remind me of dante so much. How ignorant and sheepish you are.

Hot dog boy, can't come up with an intelligent response and defend his insane blabber so its back to the insults.

Go make me a hot dog, put extra relish on there son. Thanks.

[brooks85]

Hot dog boy, can't come up with an intelligent response and defend his insane blabber so its back to the insults.

Go make me a hot dog, put extra relish on there son. Thanks.

lying isn't going to help you.

[brooks85]

No. There is no proof. That racist line of "reasoning" has been debunked over and over. Banks made risky loans because they were profitable and there was no regulation in place to prevent them. It is a banks responsibility to advise people on appropriate loans. If I hire someone to build me a wall and it falls down, its not my fault I didn't double check the builder's work.

Today there is regulation and the same behavior no longer takes place because of Obama and Financial Regulations passed in the wake of the Republican Great Recession, including bank stress tests.

lol greget again showing he is completely ignorant of the facts.


Banks would have NEVER given the loans unless they were forced to.

[Greget]

lol greget again showing he is completely ignorant of the facts.


Banks would have NEVER given the loans unless they were forced to.

Not only did they give them willingly, they would lie to borrowers about the terms and tell them they could afford loans they clearly couldn't, or alter the loans after signing .

Time to wake up brooky, not everything is the fault of black people. Most of the time it's just old fashioned greed.

[Greget]

lying isn't going to help you.

No one wants the stupid wall. Get over it.

[brooks85]

Any reasonable evidence to support that?

Not only did they give them willingly, they would lie to borrowers about the terms and tell them they could afford loans they clearly couldn't, or alter the loans after signing .

Time to wake up brooky, not everything is the fault of black people. Most of the time it's just old fashioned greed.

awesome non-response to what I said. Again, they would have never given the loans because they knew it was going to bankrupt them. And just like any good financier they made sure the loss did not fall on them.

again, the only thing you are offering is a clown show.