Clinton or trump - poll Watch

Poll: Who would you vote for in the US election?
Hillary Clinton (631)
72.45%
Donald Trump (240)
27.55%
sleepysnooze
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#21
Report 2 years ago
#21
(Original post by Orbital Rising)
Your life is a joke.

I would try to empathise with you but I can't descend to your level of cognitive functioning.
how is my life a joke? what the **** would you know about my life?
the fact that I'm against hillary clinton is all you're really riding on here
at least you're "riding" on something at least, right? poor boy
0
reply
Joep95
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#22
Report 2 years ago
#22
(Original post by Gofre)
Would you be happy with Trump in the Whitehouse while he uses his foundation's money for settling lawsuits and buying paintings of himself rather than helping people?
Only 5.7% of the clinton foundations money went on charitable grants in 2014
Whereas trumps foundation that year brought in $500,849 and gave out $591,450
2
reply
Orbital Rising
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#23
Report 2 years ago
#23
(Original post by sleepysnooze)
how is my life a joke? what the **** would you know about my life?
the fact that I'm against hillary clinton is all you're really riding on here
at least you're "riding" on something at least, right? poor boy
Oh dear 65% average and a politics student who supports Trump. This breaks my heart.
0
reply
sleepysnooze
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#24
Report 2 years ago
#24
(Original post by Orbital Rising)
Oh dear 65% average and a politics student who supports Trump. This breaks my heart.
lmao you remember me saying something as specific as this probably something like half a year ago? what are you, ****ing autistic or something?
...but either way: a 65% is a 2:1.
and a 2:1 at a russell group uni isn't some cake walk. it's actually what most people would consider quite good.
and I'm *really* not the type of person who studies hard at all. in fact, in the exam I considered the hardest last year, with 1 day of revision, I got a first. and I've got firsts before when I ran out of ink half way through the exam as well.
I mean, what are you wanting me to get here in order to ****ing prove myself? an 80%? or what, a 70? only 5 points higher? or do you want me to not even study politics? ****ing what even? I don't know what you're even trying to say. your attempts to insult me are proving hilariously pale
0
reply
Orbital Rising
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#25
Report 2 years ago
#25
(Original post by sleepysnooze)
lmao you remember me saying something as specific as this probably something like half a year ago? what are you, ****ing autistic or something?
...but either way: a 65% is a 2:1.
and a 2:1 at a russell group uni isn't some cake walk. it's actually what most people would consider quite good.
and I'm *really* not the type of person who studies hard at all. in fact, in the exam I considered the hardest last year, with 1 day of revision, I got a first. and I've got firsts before when I ran out of ink half way through the exam as well.
I mean, what are you wanting me to get here in order to ****ing prove myself? an 80%? or what, a 70? only 5 points higher? or do you want me to not even study politics? ****ing what even? I don't know what you're even trying to say
Excuses, excuses...just not good enough. I'm done talking to a pleb like you.
0
reply
sleepysnooze
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#26
Report 2 years ago
#26
(Original post by Orbital Rising)
Excuses, excuses...just not good enough. I'm done talking to a pleb like you.
a hillary supporter calling somebody a "pleb"? are you attempting irony?
and how am I "excusing" myself? hardly - I'm telling you I'm ****ing fine, actually.
0
reply
Gofre
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#27
Report 2 years ago
#27
(Original post by joecphillips)
Only 5.7% of the clinton foundations money went on charitable grants in 2014
Whereas trumps foundation that year brought in $500,849 and gave out $591,450
$100,000 of which went to an organisation suing the attorney that was suing Trump over his "university".

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-cha...151337835.html

Either way, you're missing the point. You can't dismiss Hillary's fitness for office based on her misappropriation of Foundation funds, which I am not denying, when Trump is blatantly guilty of the exact same thing.
1
reply
Joep95
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#28
Report 2 years ago
#28
(Original post by sleepysnooze)
lmao you remember me saying something as specific as this probably something like half a year ago? what are you, ****ing autistic or something?
...but either way: a 65% is a 2:1.
and a 2:1 at a russell group uni isn't some cake walk. it's actually what most people would consider quite good.
and I'm *really* not the type of person who studies hard at all. in fact, in the exam I considered the hardest last year, with 1 day of revision, I got a first. and I've got firsts before when I ran out of ink half way through the exam as well.
I mean, what are you wanting me to get here in order to ****ing prove myself? an 80%? or what, a 70? only 5 points higher? or do you want me to not even study politics? ****ing what even? I don't know what you're even trying to say
They want you to think exactly like them, it's sad really 2 countries built on challenging what has been socially acceptable, they forget if everyone accepted the norms and voted democrat blacks would still be slaves
0
reply
Joep95
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#29
Report 2 years ago
#29
(Original post by Gofre)
$100,000 of which went to an organisation suing the attorney that was suing Trump over his "university".

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-cha...151337835.html

Either way, you're missing the point. You can't dismiss Hillary's fitness for office based on her misappropriation of Foundation funds, which I am not denying, when Trump is blatantly guilty of the exact same thing.
That money could also be said to have gone to a right wing groups that have been involved in important constitutional cases.
It's not exactly the best look but it does not necessarily make it illegal unlike a Secretary of State giving special access to donors.

The trump foundation gave over around 30% of the money they brought in to cancer alone which is a lot more than 5.6%
0
reply
999tigger
Badges: 19
#30
Report 2 years ago
#30
(Original post by joecphillips)
That money could also be said to have gone to a right wing groups that have been involved in important constitutional cases.
It's not exactly the best look but it does not necessarily make it illegal unlike a Secretary of State giving special access to donors.

The trump foundation gave over around 30% of the money they brought in to cancer alone which is a lot more than 5.6%
The Trump foundation has no staff?
Whether 30% amounts to more than 5.6% in money terms would depend on the size of the respective charities.
How much money have they both raised?
0
reply
Joep95
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#31
Report 2 years ago
#31
(Original post by 999tigger)
The Trump foundation has no staff?
Whether 30% amounts to more than 5.6% in money terms would depend on the size of the respective charities.
How much money have they both raised?
The value of the donations is not relevant, 94.3% of the clinton foundations money does not go towards charitable purposes.
0
reply
Zargabaath
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#32
Report 2 years ago
#32
Trump
0
reply
PersonInProgress
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#33
Report 2 years ago
#33
The number of people saying Trump in the comments is scary
4
reply
999tigger
Badges: 19
#34
Report 2 years ago
#34
(Original post by joecphillips)
The value of the donations is not relevant, 94.3% of the clinton foundations money does not go towards charitable purposes.
Having now looked into this you are wrong yet again.

You fail to distinguish between a charitable grant giving foundation and an operating charity. Do you understand the difference?

The clue is that a charitable grant giving charity operates by giving grants, guess what sort of charity the Clinton Foundation is.

Your statement is based on a basic failure to understand of how charities work.
1
reply
#ChaosKass
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#35
Report 2 years ago
#35
Trump, of course. Killary voters should hang their heads in shame.
1
reply
yudothis
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#36
Report 2 years ago
#36
(Original post by #ChaosKass)
Trump, of course. Killary voters should hang their heads in shame.
Funny.

Donald supporters should be cleansed from the human gene pool.
2
reply
RobML
Badges: 6
Rep:
?
#37
Report 2 years ago
#37
(Original post by #ChaosKass)
Trump, of course. Killary voters should hang their heads in shame.
your mum is a chinese conspiracy

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
yudothis
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#38
Report 2 years ago
#38
(Original post by sleepysnooze)
a hillary supporter calling somebody a "pleb"? are you attempting irony?
and how am I "excusing" myself? hardly - I'm telling you I'm ****ing fine, actually.
Not sure what the argument was, but that is incredibly apt.

Donald voters are just that, plebs. Hanging onto every single one of his words because he speaks what they think "boohoo my life is **** and everyone else is at fault but me", "boohoo Hilary is the establishment, the establishment is at fault for me having a *****y life and they have a great life".
0
reply
sleepysnooze
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#39
Report 2 years ago
#39
(Original post by yudothis)
Not sure what the argument was, but that is incredibly apt.

Donald voters are just that, plebs. Hanging onto every single one of his words because he speaks what they think "boohoo my life is **** and everyone else is at fault but me", "boohoo Hilary is the establishment, the establishment is at fault for me having a *****y life and they have a great life".
are somehow you're saying hillary supporters are less plebian? since when were soccer moms not plebs?
and you're saying that the establishment as a static and stagnant institution of american politics doesn't really exist - seriously? you think that? you don't think that the concept of "establishment" doesn't hold weight with regards to at least this candidate that we're talking about here, the one who came from the family of a president, to then use her influence as the first lady to become a senator, and from then a sec. of state and then here to being a presidential nominee? the one who tires to sell herself as some sort of duv yet is more hawkish than even most republicans? the one who is given surprising amount of money from wallstreet totally not for favours? the one who basically criminally mishandles information? the one who switches policy positions not via conviction but via public relations? the one who isn't going to change basically anything that obama did except for a more aggressive foreign policy? what do you take hillary for exactly, then? a "great reformer"? she is a totally stock, run of the mill, mediocre, bland, dry and predictable career politician. that is a politician of an establishment. to not challenge the established manners of state but rather to be a prostitute to it and to ignore the greater desires of the people who hate the system that they have.
0
reply
yudothis
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#40
Report 2 years ago
#40
(Original post by sleepysnooze)
are somehow you're saying hillary supporters are less plebian? since when were soccer moms not plebs?
and you're saying that the establishment as a static and stagnant institution of american politics doesn't really exist - seriously? you think that? you don't think that the concept of "establishment" doesn't hold weight with regards to at least this candidate that we're talking about here, the one who came from the family of a president, to then use her influence as the first lady to become a senator, and from then a sec. of state and then here to being a presidential nominee? the one who tires to sell herself as some sort of duv yet is more hawkish than even most republicans? the one who is given surprising amount of money from wallstreet totally not for favours? the one who basically criminally mishandles information? the one who switches policy positions not via conviction but via public relations? the one who isn't going to change basically anything that obama did except for a more aggressive foreign policy? what do you take hillary for exactly, then? a "great reformer"?
that's what trump is saying, the crooked elite, that's how he is appealing to people. i am not saying anything. moreover, what does it matter what the definition is, it's what people interpret and they all do as they want.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts

All the exam results help you need

1,842

people online now

225,530

students helped last year
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

How are you feeling about GCSE Results Day?

Hopeful (204)
12.72%
Excited (140)
8.73%
Worried (291)
18.14%
Terrified (364)
22.69%
Meh (144)
8.98%
Confused (35)
2.18%
Putting on a brave face (221)
13.78%
Impatient (205)
12.78%

Watched Threads

View All