U.S. Politics 2017: So much for the tolerant SPPf

Not quite; I'm saying the accusations made against Hillary have dissuaded me from putting our future in her hands.

I'm not voting for either of them, though, cause I don't want to act like an offensive a**w1pe or a naïve pleb (mostly 'cause I have friends who'd look down on me for voting for either).

 

That's honestly even worse than not voting at all. If you want to vote, then don't let friends stop you.

 

agreed with Yuoke, you also don't have to tell your friends you voted

 

FYI, she's not going to cause nuclear war with the Russians. Where the **** do people come up with this ****?

 

i guess he named himself truly deceptive for a reason

 

They came up with that because "WWIII will occur under a Clinton regime" has become the latest of memes that they hope will stick this time.

 

My signature (before it got removed) used to include "The truth can oft be more misleading..." (not as if you care).

You do realize JFK got shot in the head 2 weeks after giving that speech, right? Wait; nvm. 2 years. Didn't even check my facts.

 

Solution: find new friends. (Harder solution: find a third-party candidate who doesn't have the brain of a sea sponge.)

Never mind. I find this to be immensely telling.

 

Thank you God, I finally get to reply to a JFK conspiracy idiot.

TD, I've read ALL the JFK theories, and I believe none of them. IMOHO, The Purge: Election Year is a more realistic political story than the nonsense folks spout, which is full of conflicting theories so diverse they could fill the Library of Alexandra.

What was or is the truth? It depends greatly on who you ask.

Some believe that the CIA was behind it. They were very angry at Kennedy over the whole mess with the Bay of Pigs. A name that comes up often with them in regards to this is David Sánchez Morales, a CIA agent who had lost several friends and colleges in the failed invasion.

Some suspect the Mafia. Attorney General Robert Kennedy had introduced many strict reforms against organized crime, and it stood to reason that killing his brother – the President – would be a subtle message for him to yield. Not to mention that the mob had lost a lot of business in Cuba when Castro took over, and might have blamed Kennedy for that.

One powerful figure in organized crime mentioned more than others was Sam Giancana who may have had a lot of reasons for wanting Kennedy dead. There were allegations by the Republican Party that he rigged the Illinois elections so that Kennedy would win, and some believed he was upset now because of the tougher reforms (of course, even if Illinois' Electoral Votes had not gone to Kennedy, he still would have won), OR that Kennedy had stolen his girlfriend, OR that Giancana was involved in some plot to assassinate Castro… Again, it varies depending on who the speaker is.

Then there was the theory that filmmaker Oliver Stone used, that the military-industrial complex was behind it, fearing the President would abandon South Vietnam to the communists, hurting their business. (You can blame the Red Scare on this. People those days saw a communist behind every tree, it seemed.)

Other popular theories to suspected masterminds: The KGB, who wanted revenge for being humiliated after the Cuban Missile crisis; Lyndon B. Johnson, who some thought feared would be dropped from the ticket in Kennedy's reelection; the Federal Reserve, who thought Executive Order 1110 was the beginning of a push to abolish them; the Cuban Exile community, who felt Kennedy had betrayed them at the Bay of Pigs (starting to see a trend here?); and on the flip side to that, Fidel Castro, who sought retaliation for constant attempts on his life.

There was even one theory that Oswald did act alone, but Kennedy was not his target. According to this one, his true intended victim was Texas Governor John Connally (who was also in the car). Why? Well, Connally was then Secretary of the Navy, and some felt that Oswald may have held him responsible for his undesirable discharge from the Marines. Oswald's widow staunchly believed this one.

Some of the crazier theorists believe Haitian dictator (and our very reluctant ally at the time) François Duvalier, who claimed he had put a voodoo curse on Kennedy. (Guys like Duvalier should logically act as a lesson and prevent nations from trusting or tolerating insane leaders, but it seems nobody does.)

Most theories include Jack Ruby, the vigilante who killed Oswald. They claim that he was "in on it", and had killed Oswald to silence him. Ruby was convicted of murder and sentenced to death, but died in prison – from lung cancer, the coroner's report said – while his sentence was on appeal.

When you look at all these theories as a whole, you realize they can't ALL be right. The more you group them all together, the more absurd the overall idea becomes. They conflict and contradict each other in several areas. They only agree on one thing: The Warren Report is a sham, and the government was lying. This in turn, is rooted in the fact that some guys can't trust authority and love to challenge it. Regardless of the potential consequences.

No one ever considers that Lee Harvey Oswald - like those guys who love to challenge authority - was just a deranged loner who wanted to be a white supremacist hero. Which is most likely the case. And look where it got him.

 

People Around the World are preparing for a WW||| because of this Presidential Election. I cant vote yet but hope Trump does not win.

 

WW3 is unlikely no matter which candidate wins, however, our economy and world reputation would suffer greatly if Trump were to be elected. IMO, the war thing is fear mongering on both sides of the aisle. Still don't want Trump elected tho.

 

What are you basing that probability on? I'd say WWIII is still possible given Trump's repeated remarks about how Presidents should be allowed to 'push the [nuclear] button' and the need to 'wipe out ISIS' in Syria are evidence enough his actions as POTUS could lead to a world war with other nations, and the fact that Vladimir Putin has already said he does not want Hillary Clinton to win is concerning enough.

I don't think there will be a world war however, not on the same scale as the previous two (That is, if the western media can stop producing the mass hysteria of there being a war and stop painting Putin as a panto villain).

 

If you take Trump at face value, I could understand why WW3 would be a concern, however, I think he couldn't hack the presidency, and give the position to Pence. Granted, I really don't want there to be another world war, so I'm biased.

 

Sometimes you just have to take someone at face value, Chess. It's too big a risk.

Trump says he will overturn Roe vs Wade, says there shouldn't be a minimum wage at all, would not allow women to access Planned Parenthood, and would jail political adversaries. He brags about being a predator, believes in "global conspiracies" rigging the U.S elections, and he's a birther.

To most, he sees insane. And I say, take it at face value.

 

Well, he's not gonna win, so the possibility of WW3 is pretty much off the table. I guess I'm being more generous to him than I should be, and you're absolutely right. He's bananas, to put it lightly. He clearly lives in his own bubble world and nothing's gonna penetrate it.

 

To say the least about Trump, take a shot for every headache you've heard from him: the wall, his tax plan, his comments on women etc.

 

Somehow, I doubt he'd get any of those policies past Congress.

 

And it's the Supreme Court that overturns rulings.