Richard Hanna Becomes First Republican Congressman To Say He’ll Vote For Hillary Clinton

Thanks for your input.

Its always good to hear life advice from those who cant afford their own birth control.

a reply to: shooterbrody

When asked about reasons to vote for someone, breaking the law is not high on my list.

That is your opinion and you are welcome to it. If that is how you feel, you may want to withhold your support for Trump, if that is whom you support, until his court proceedings have come to it's final conclusion.

You choose to back those who treat national security carelessly, that is your choice.

I do not back Hillary, but I am thinking I need to reconsider.

If that is what your "education" consists of you can keep it.

Ya, facts and knowing what one is talking about can be a difficult task. Most tend to push an "education" away when it doesn't fit their agenda.

Oh well, not my problem, but it does make it tough to talk about issues like this when people are too lazy to inform themselves.

originally posted by: Nucleardoom

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: DBCowboy

Don't you think it is troubling that not even Trump's own party wants to support him?

Not when you look at Hillary's side. Seems like there is more defection on that side with Bernie voters. I'd guess it's better than 30% of the Dems don't want anything to do with her. Don't you find that troubling?

Yeah that must be why this happened: Post-convention poll: Clinton retakes lead over Trump

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: DBCowboy

Don't you think it is troubling that not even Trump's own party wants to support him?

That's been apparent for some time. We've been saying for years that the major parties are both the same, that they continue to alienate voters, and here we are with a candidate the people overwhelmingly selected. And the party is upset? Good. They have failed to present decent candidates for years. Last time the GOP lost in a situation where they felt they "ought to have won" they commissioned a study about this failure. It cost a lot of money and time. One of THE major conclusions the study came to was that the party needed to get behind the candidate the people chose. Here we have a candidate that the people chose and what does the party do? NOT support him.

In other words, they didn't learn a thing. The mainstream GOP wanted Bush 3, but he crashed and burned while spending a fortune. Then they wanted Rubio, an inexperienced politician like Obama, who would do what the party wanted. And he didn't do much better. Then the party wanted Kasich, who managed to win his home state and little else. He is uninspiring. So the party had Cruz, whom they did not like, a Bible thumping right winger, and Trump, who, when you actually LOOK at his official positions instead if his rhetoric, is very much a moderate, not a conservative. And the party doesn't want him either.

So who could have the party put up that had a chance? Ryan would have been a good choice. He's charismatic, young, decently conservative without going crazy, and with little baggage. But Nooooo! He didn't want to! I think he would have done well had he chosen to run. So when you say that is it not troubling that "not even Trump's own party wants to support him" as if this were a condemnation of Trump, I'm thinking it is actually a condemnation of the party. The party screwed up. Again. The party's base of supporters which they have ignored far too long just turned against the established order and told the party to stuff it. And I'm quite sure that could we hack the GOP's emails we'd find the exact same back room back stabbing that we see with the Dems.

Is it troubling? Sure--for the GOP because they still obviously don't get it.

a reply to: introvert

Ya, facts and knowing what one is talking about can be a difficult task. Most tend to push an "education" away when it doesn't fit their agenda.

Yeah cause I was the one to post quotes from Comey.
Scroll back an read them again.
There was evidence.
Others have been prosecuted for the same.
She was careless with national security.
She lied to congress.
ALL Facts.
They just don't suit your political ideology so you cast them aside.

a reply to: introvert

No. She no longer works for the SD. What can they do?

I think this issue should disqualify you from holding any public office, since she have no clue on what is the right way to handle classified info. Ignorance is not a legal excuse in which to break the law. This is a legitimate issue:

The President has no security clearance, in the sense that other employees of the federal government do. Simply put, there is no document held by the United States government that the President is restricted from viewing for reasons of national security. It's also impossible for the President to violate a security classification; the President has the absolute authority to decide who is and is not entitled to know what is in a classified document, and may reveal any classified fact he or she deems appropriate to any person at any time for any reason (except possibly for a few narrow cases where specific statutes make such releases illegal).

I know I don't want someone so careless handling ^^that^^ level of responsibility when they couldn't handle the responsibility of far less, and million of Americans agree.

a reply to: schuyler

So explain to me how Trump will accomplish anything, if elected, without the support of either major political party?

a reply to: shooterbrody

Others have been prosecuted for the same.

Prove that.

Good luck.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: introvert

Ya, facts and knowing what one is talking about can be a difficult task. Most tend to push an "education" away when it doesn't fit their agenda.

Others have been prosecuted for the same.

Who are these "others"? Care to cite some case examples that mimic Hillary's situation?

a reply to: Krazysh0t

WELL THAT is WHY we are GOOD at conspiracies here,WE already KNOW from decades of cross correllation.
I feel it gave me a superior insight having read so many books and reading about history,Sci Fi just was my favorite lifelong drug.
WE HAVE been watching her and THAT is our choice,all the desperate attempts of deflection are wasted on us.
BECAUSE so many ,JUST want revenge... words such as these for Hillary are "lamentations of those driven before them"

a reply to: Nucleardoom

I think this issue should disqualify you from holding any public office

That is your opinion. Write your representative or leave them a voicemail stating your grievance if you want laws changed to reflect your opinion.

I know I don't want someone so careless handling ^^that^^ level of responsibility when they couldn't handle the responsibility of far less, and million of Americans agree.

Then don't vote for her. All you're doing here is wasting our time.

a reply to: introvert

usuncut.com...

The Obama administration has filed more charges against those who leak classified information than all previous presidential administrations combined, according to a statement made by CNN’s Jake Tapper that was marked “True” by Politifact. The culture of secrecy in Washington is so prevalent that former CIA and NSA Director Michael Hayden famously said in 2010, “Everything’s secret. I mean, I got an email saying ‘Merry Christmas.’ It carried a top secret NSA classification marking.

That was tough
Guess google is too tough for you

a reply to: Krazysh0t

That's one of the reason's I feel sorry for Al Capone. The poor guy got a bad rap his entire life.

All these wild rumors, innuendos, and myths about him and all he ever did wrong was fudge some numbers on his taxes.

Talk about getting the %#$$ end of the stick.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: introvert

usuncut.com...

The Obama administration has filed more charges against those who leak classified information than all previous presidential administrations combined, according to a statement made by CNN’s Jake Tapper that was marked “True” by Politifact. The culture of secrecy in Washington is so prevalent that former CIA and NSA Director Michael Hayden famously said in 2010, “Everything’s secret. I mean, I got an email saying ‘Merry Christmas.’ It carried a top secret NSA classification marking.

That was tough
Guess google is too tough for you

Well, that was a weak attempt. Can you provide a specific case that can verify your claim of people being "prosecuted for the same"?

a reply to: Krazysh0t

www.thepoliticalinsider.com...

Google is too hard for you as well

State Department Official Fired and Security Clearance Revoked After Linking to Classified Wikileaks Document: Peter Van Buren, a foreign service officer for Hillary’s State Department, was fired and his security clearance revoked for quoting a Wikileaks document AFTER publishing a book critical of Clinton. In fact, the Washington Post reported that one of his firing infractions was “showing ‘bad judgement’ by criticizing Clinton and then-Rep. Michele Bachmann on his blog.” Read more: www.thepoliticalinsider.com...

a reply to: cavtrooper7

Is that why? Looks to me like confirmation bias, but hey whatever you want to believe.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: schuyler

So explain to me how Trump will accomplish anything, if elected, without the support of either major political party?

If he's elected he'll have as much of a chance as anyone else. Like I said, if you actually LOOK at his stated positions, he's a very middle-of-the-road guy on most issues and mildly conservative on others. What we're seeing here is a personality issue with some butt hurt Republicans acting out because they got spanked. I'm not particularly concerned. If he doesn't shut up he may talk himself out of the Presidency anyway, but that won't fix the GOP.

a reply to: 200Plus

That isn't even CLOSE to an apt comparison...

a reply to: schuyler

I have looked at his policy positions (which strangely wasn't what you just linked). They are terrible.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: 200Plus

That isn't even CLOSE to an apt comparison...

You're having a difficult time recognizing sarcasm today.