News Breaking Down the 2016 POTUS Race Contenders & Issues

[mheslep]

Jobs for fund raisers is old news, though it's risen to new heights of the absurdly incompetent in the Obama administration.

 

[Salvador]

This is getting better by the day.Basically the Democrats have destroyed any leverage they have on criticizing Republicans or Russia or anyone who does the same thing they do.

Ok I might not get any likes on my post and that's fine but I want to say how I feel and how I see this.
First of all , if the ambassador thing is real and it most probably is , it is shameful of anyone to do this and Obama is no exception.It's basically fat old rich folks or sometimes maybe a little younger less fat still rich folks buying themselves a thing with which to show off later to their friends.
How come such an important job as an ambassador to a foreign country especially one with much influence and ties to US like UK or other countries can be bought for money.

But speaking more generally here's a thing about the Clintons and Obama, for example Obama is the kind of man who looks terrific at first , he seems like all the things he says "HOPE" "YES WE CAN" and to give him the benefit of doubt I would say maybe he even himself thinks that way and maybe his as innocent as a toddler playing around a sandbox from which all kinds of evil pedophiles are lurking.Maybe even he knows nothing about any bought office seat or doesn't have second thoughts about what he says publicly. Even if all this were true he still fails on all these issues , you are a hypocrite no matter whether you tell one thing and do the other on purpose or accidentally , the end result is still the same , better yet that you do it intentionally because when it happens accidentally , well there's a word for that - fool.
So basically this is how it seems from aside. The only real difference between "repubs" and "dems" is that the first ones aren't good enough liars and mostly they just say what they think and it sounds outrageous to many , the second ones want to do all the same outrageous stuff but they simply mask it cleverly behind appealing modern liberal slogans like "HOPE" "EQUALITY"
Maybe a harsh analog but , mind you the USSR under Stalin also did mass killings in the name of "EQUALITY" , because you see once we will shoot out all the bad folks - all the good ones then will be equal.
Back to modern liberal democracy - once we make everyone equal enough and all rights the same and blur all genders into one people will suddenly become better. Oh really ? :D Is this how this works?

There is a strong feeling that many supporters of modern liberal movement really have those blind eyes on what they support.I regularly go through liberal media sites and conservative sites and the thing I have noticed in the commentary from both the editors the authors and the public is that conservatives think they will be able to bring back the "good old days" and so they are willing to accept literally anyone who would help them do it - aka Trump , Also notice how much they mentioned Ronald Reagan in the debates and how they relate to him. And then there are the liberals , they believe that folks like Obama , Clinton and many others will truly make future better.Everytime I read their comments it makes me have this weird feeling the same feeling I get when I see someone being played a fool , I see texts like " Oh Hillary does take large sums of money from doubtful sources, so what Trump is still worse" Another thing I cannot help myself but to notice over these past 8 years , the Obama administration has been outplayed in their foreign policy like a kid.No really no hard feelings intended and no hate towards the US just mere facts and reflections , the man hated by the Democrats (atleast publicly) Vladimir Putin has outplayed them so many times.It's funny that now they blame him for the DNC hack , now sure he probably had much to do with it as it serves his purpose and I believe many things happening in the world have much to do with Kremlin , but in the end what difference does it make , it's not like the information isn't true, so are we going to deny all of it simply because the US adversary may have helped to make it public?

That's like crapping your pants with pieces falling out of the trouser leg and outright denying that it has happened ,in front of all your friends watching, simply because the one who pointed out that you did it, is your worst friend.

Just to stir some controversy here.
Europe just as the US in the past were nations whose society were based on Christian values , as Christianity was the dominant force throughout the centuries up until the industrial revolution and also the revolution of thought pushed forward by many often troubled and sometimes evil folks like Nietzsche for example.
I am not saying the Church didn't do bad stuff , sure but if we look at theory the belief was that if you steal it doesn't matter how much you are a crook no matter the sum or stuff , because the very thought of taking what doesn't belong to you makes the case.
Now when you are a liar it doesn't matter how big of a liar you are , lies are still lies.
Same goes for murder , after the first one it actually doesn't matter how many , you are a murderer , just that appetite grows with eating.

So for me this goes like this , the US has disqualified itself from criticizing folks like Putin and Russia or Iran or any other nation who may use things like force to suppress movements that are in opposition to the ruling elite or use propaganda to make their case or the silencing of media.
Because as I follow this campaign closely I see the same pattern in the US , the biasing of opinion , silence on certain critical issues , definitely propaganda from both parties.The only one thing lacking is brute force but I'm sure if things will go down this way it's only a matter of time...

So the quick resume for the past 8 years for me is that basically the US administration has been no better than any of it's adversaries , simply that it's adversaries have won more than the US.
Take the olympics for example , if you play by the rules and your opponent wins with the use of illegal means then you get to publicly denounce him, but if you both play by covert and illegal means and then your opponent wins , then your opponent is simply better than you, case closed.

 

[Salvador]

Another thing that pisses me off , hopefully it does the same to whoever is reading this.
Trump coming to Jimmy Fallon is now almost a crime , hardcore liberals shouting that we should boycott Fallon , oh so it's a late night talk show and comedy thing ,why can't anyone be on that show?
Again and again this just goes to prove that there is a strong wish and possibly more than just wish to bias opinion and change what people should hear.
Propaganda is the word , I believe.

Back in 2012 when Letterman made Trump look bad when he publicly showed Trump's shirts and ties and asked him whether they are made in China everyone seemed to be ok with such a show but now when Fallon jokes with Trump on his show it is somehow wrong.This is damn foolish.

For example , maybe I don't like young girls having unprotected sex or making stupid mistakes in terms of who they sleep with in general and maybe I don't support abortions but then that is my opinion and my right to it , so is my right to seeing a man who doesn't show his tax returns , maybe I like that , how does someone dare to say I shouldn't have that option or decide what I need to see and what I don't, oh but sure let's all forget that and focus on Russia , oh you see they have a bad human rights record... Nothing bad about the DNC emails because "RUSSIA DID IT!" Just focus on what we tell you to focus on and stop thinking about what's really going on.Speaking about the DNC

http://europe.newsweek.com/seth-ric...nge-hillary-clinton-donald-trump-492084?rm=euSure it may sound or even be a conspiracy theory but first, it's from a public official news site not some Alex Jones channel , secondly it's hard to tell the difference between lies and truth anymore so for me this story is credible given all the other things that are happening.and to give the opposite side of the agenda , drum roll ... Huffingtonpost - a super liberal newsblog pretending to be a serious news site , which actively and beyond any doubt supports everything that has to do with Clinton and Obama.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/hillary-clinton-seth-rich_us_57b1ddede4b007c36e4f5ffaPersonally I look at Huffpo only to entertain myself as their bias is so open and visible that 5 year olds are going like " Mommy Mommy is this what daddy calls propaganda?"
They are like the opposite of RT in terms of how they show the world.

Sure Ariana is probably laughing and enjoying herself because whatever the people think doesn't matter as long as it makes headlines and so makes money.

 

[Vanadium 50]

Jobs for fund raisers is old news, though it's risen to new heights of the absurdly incompetent in the Obama administration.

Yes, and that's why the US sent a soap opera producer to be ambassador to Hungary. But that's nothing new, excpet in magnitude. What is new is that donors to a private foundation run by the Secretary of State get federal appointments in State. (Maybe this is good, maybe this is bad, but it's new)

[JOKE]
Madam Secretary, did you receive a bribe for this appointment?
Certainly not! I appointed him because I like him!
We have evidence that he gave you a million dollars.
Man gives you a million dollars, you're going to like him!
[/JOKE]

 

[jim hardy]

So the quick resume for the past 8 years for me is that basically the US administration has been no better than any of it's adversaries , simply that it's adversaries have won more than the US.

You live in Europe, i believe ?
Thanks for the observations ! That's why i try to watch foreign newscasts .

O would some power the giftie gie us to see ourselves as others see us

old jim

 

[mheslep]

But that's nothing new, excpet in magnitude.

Per Senator McCain, ambassadorships for bungling fund raisers used to be limited to the like island nations, e.g. Vanuatu. More irritating is the fact that the Senate failed to reject those nominees. Even under Reid, there were sufficient respectable Senators in the majority that could have said no.

 

[Bystander]

sufficient respectable Senators in the majority that could have said no.

Obviously, there were not.

 

[russ_watters]

Another thing that pisses me off , hopefully it does the same to whoever is reading this.
Trump coming to Jimmy Fallon is now almost a crime , hardcore liberals shouting that we should boycott Fallon , oh so it's a late night talk show and comedy thing ,why can't anyone be on that show?

To be honest, you're ranting a bit and I'm not really following your point, however I did see some backlash against Fallon saying he "lost credibility" as a "member of the media" for making fun of Trump (a hair-mussing) instead of grilling him. This is worrisome to me, but not for the reason stated: it is worrisome because Fallon is a comedian, not a member of the media and for a comedian, "credibility" isn't a "thing" for him to have or not have. It isn't part of the job description. This idea that it is or should be or even possibly could be part of his job description is a symptom of the continued decline in political discourse in this country.

That said, while not a good thing, it is deliciously ironic to me that after complaining for years about the credibility of conservative talk radio, liberals have found their voice in credibility-irrelevant comedians! And I do love irony ever-so-much!

Disclaimer: It's not that I don't care, it's just that I'm so jaded I've decided I may as well just sit back and watch the show. It's liberating.

 

[jim hardy]

Disclaimer: It's not that I don't care, it's just that I'm so jaded I've decided may as well just sit back and watch the show. It's liberating.

i had to detach too.

 

[phinds]

i had to detach too.

Yeah, I may have posted this before, but I think it's appropriate in this thread at this time:

 

[Salvador]

That joke you wrote in your last post Vanadium , you might as well take away the (JOKE) signs , as it is closer to reality than to a joke.
So maybe the reality is becoming a joke ...

Yes indeed @russ_waters , well it's a bit sad for me that you didn't get my point but then again I was drinking my morning coffee and was a bit full of energy.
Anyway you are absolutely correct in pointing out that the once free liberals who argued against censorship of comedy and the use of rude words and freedom of speech and all other kinds of stuff are now so worried and even pissed off and angry that a comedian and his team and his writers choose to do a certain deal with Trump and approach him in a certain way , Jesus Christ , it's their full right to do so as a private company , they have their freedom of speech and their using it for good.

Oh but no , the whiny little liberal somewhere got offended just because the game isn't going the way, he himself appointed little ruler of the earth, wanted it.
Funny isn't it. The first sign that something is wrong with people is usually when they can't take a joke , the next part is when they deny reality, after that things go downhill so fast you better buckle a seat belt.

And I'm trying real hard to rant less , after all who am I , I myself am a sad little individual who loves his cat , recycles scrap metal and basically tries to clean up trash people left at the forest just to realize that even if I care there are another 10 000 that don't because their too stupid and ignorant , and this goes not only for trashing after yourself it goes for everything from politics to culture to family life.

Today I randomly watched a guy in youtube asking Californians what they think about Trump's sons killing endangered animals in Africa (which is a false statement to test one's level of knowledge) and everyone replied that it's bad and he shouldn't do that and some said it's ok , and then some didn't know what 9/11 stands for and from which country the hijackers were.And sure you could say oh this is staged for the video to make it funny etc but you know I think it's actually the reality , people are dumb as f***
Just to prove my point , I have a friend who thinks that the Earth is flat , well we aren't the best of friends (for a reason) it's hard to talk to him because he perceives many things differently.
I have other guys whom I know of who still think free energy is possible , and I could go on and on about the various encounters with lack of knowledge and outright stupidity I have come across.
I mean you don't need to be a nuclear physicist but atleast cmoon , know something about life.

So I came to a conclusion while drinking my coffee , sure this would never go through in a country like US , or in any other major democracy but instead of having a ban on immigrants which might be good , or instead of having all kinds of background checks , we would really benefit from a voting background check , in other words anyone is allowed to vote say from the age 16, but before your vote is cast you must fill out a check form which has questions that basically test whether you are intellectual and creative or whether you are a damn redneck or an absolutely worthless trash.
Just an idea while drinking my coffee, imagine that you would probably get some 20% less voters yet the vote itself would be more accurate and thought through , it would simply be better as the ones who are easy to manipulate with would be given no chance to decide important things for a big country let them better do their laundry or take out the trash.

 

[phinds]

Since we seem to be on a roll about political correctness run amok, here's one of my favorites:

 

[TurtleMeister]

So I came to a conclusion while drinking my coffee , sure this would never go through in a country like US , or in any other major democracy but instead of having a ban on immigrants which might be good , or instead of having all kinds of background checks , we would really benefit from a voting background check , in other words anyone is allowed to vote say from the age 16, but before your vote is cast you must fill out a check form which has questions that basically test whether you are intellectual and creative or whether you are a damn redneck or an absolutely worthless trash.
Just an idea while drinking my coffee, imagine that you would probably get some 20% less voters yet the vote itself would be more accurate and thought through , it would simply be better as the ones who are easy to manipulate with would be given no chance to decide important things for a big country let them better do their laundry or take out the trash.

That would give Clinton the White House because according to the media that 20% would be Trump supporters.

 

[Vanadium 50]

but before your vote is cast you must fill out a check form which has questions that basically test whether you are intellectual and creative or whether you are a damn redneck or an absolutely worthless trash.

Ah, yes. "The deplorables shouldn't get a vote" argument. We heard similar suggestions post-Brexit. Is it any wonder why the Depolrables are lining up against the politics that suggests they be disenfranchised?

 

[jim hardy]

imagine that you would probably get some 20% less voters yet the vote itself would be more accurate and thought through , it would simply be better as the ones who are easy to manipulate with would be given no chance to decide important things for a big country let them better do their laundry or take out the trash.

Who you going to trust to decide ? Both parties would salivate at the thought of that kind of power.

i don't think you've thought that one through.

 

[Salvador]

Ok , maybe you folks took my argument too personally , here's my reasoning and again this is just an idea so let's not judge.
I know personally a lot of people who are very reckless when it comes to voting , like they don't care but oh sure when the voting day is here they still go and vote simply because... they can.But when I talk to them , sometimes randomly just when I meet someone there is no argument as to why he or she or whoever is better , no basic knowledge even of the candidates past , simply something alongside " Oh I like him better simply because I think he is better"

In my country many folks whom I consider a bit higher than the average , even they I have heard sometimes go like "Oh I'm going to vote for this man because he is rich and he could make us rich" And we were speaking about a local oligarch who has got his money from shady deals and probably also smart schemes of taxpayers money. And like it's all over the news and so on and some folks just go like "oh what a great business man he must be"
And it's really hard for me to sit at the dinner table and eat with them as they are friends of mine yet at the same time realizing that while they are ok in all other fields of their life they simply either don't have a clue or are ignorant towards voting.
Also many go by the phrase "what does it matter it's just a single vote" and when a few millions of these "what do my vote matters" come together they suddenly matter.A democracy can only work if the majority of the society has atleast some clue and are vigilant enough , I'm sure the founding fathers knew that.Democracy is especially "fragile" towards this very aspect that it is "in theory" the rule of the masses , and if the masses somehow are blind or have become blind enough or ignorant enough then the political process can be exploited by people who simply give the public what they want to hear.
It's a two way street , the candidates present themselves but the public must evaluate them and then decide which one is better , if the public somehow stops doing it's job or lacks behind in the ability to do so then democracy is in trouble.
Don't you think it's happening right now?

This is also the reason why democracy can't be simply applied like a sticker to countries and societies that have lived in a tyranny or dictatorship for long or societies whose values and way of life including religion is vastly different than the western Christian neo liberal thought.
Democracy is not an export also not an import it forms if the conditions are right , and it collapses if the variables somehow degrade over time.As for the US , some of you said , ok if you applied such voter checking, Hillary would win. Why ? Does that mean the average Trump supporter is a fool? No honestly tell me as I am not from the US and maybe I have gotten something mixed up here although I have a feeling what the answer might be.

In itself I think it speaks volumes of the US that you only have two candidates now running for office of which both are a dead end apocalypse for the other party voters.So much so that now even comedians are starting to fear whether they can invite one of them for an interview or not or will that spark an outcry larger than a tsunami.

 

[Bystander]

Don't you think it's happeninged (fait accompli) right now?

 

[jartsa]

I know personally a lot of people who are very reckless when it comes to voting , like they don't care but oh sure when the voting day is here they still go and vote simply because... they can.

So how about: Anyone that does not vote gets paid X dollars and also gets the right to vote on some election, some kind of "special election"?

Hmm some more choices for the non-voter: Either X dollars or Y% tax deduction for not voting. We must think about the rich too. But now this is getting too complicated ... so how about simply: If you vote in one election you can not vote in some other election. We wan the dumb votes to coalesce together, and the hopefully to go somewhere where they do not do too much harm.

 

[phinds]

To describe the depths of my dislike for Trump I would have to go WAY beyond the forum rules but all this talk about how bad his supporters are distresses me. While it is true that many of them are probably folks who are not likely to be thought of as astute critical thinkers that doesn't mean they are dumb and categorizing them as "deplorables" and many other pejorative adjectives is, I think, neither true nor helpful. Probably a small minority of his supporters ARE deplorable people, but the vast majority are very likely fine hard-working Americans who are beyond fed up with Wall Street bankers ruining the economy and walking away with millions rather than jail terms, a congress that gets little to nothing done, wages that have stagnated for 30 years (that last one does seem to be showing small signs of improvement), and just generally a "system" that does not seem to be on their side at all. I deplore their conclusion that Trump is any kind of answer to any of that, but demonizing of the opposition is one of the main reasons why we are where we are today. I don't mean demonizing Trump himself (I'm fine with that ) but his supporters.

Personally, I'm going to hold my nose, fortify myself with antiemetics and vote for Hilary because she's the only viable alternative, but I do not impugn the motives of Trump's supporters en toto.

The American form of democracy has its flaws for sure, but it IS a democracy, not any kind of oligarchy even if it shows some signs of being one sometimes.

 

[Salvador]

Well you are correct phinds , Democrats don't like whenever someone attacks them , but when they attack it's somehow fine. Their attacking now almost everyone , Trump supporters , comedians that have the gut to do what they think, they teach foreign powers on what's better like Obama's Brexit speech which if not useless then only escalated the very thing he tried to argue against.
The list goes on.

The Democrats are like the poor man fighting against the rich guy , they started out poor and thought that they will do only good , then the man got rich and started being ignorant and now his filthy rich and he does the same thing the man who was filthy rich before him did.
Just as money corrupts , freedom corrupts too , also power , basically everything makes you bad if you loose control over it.Let me be a little advocate for Trump for a moment , I check out many news sites on daily basis and I can assure you or anyone else the game is rigged indeed , maybe not in a way Trump suggests but in a more general and sinister way indeed.
There are certain news outlets that are neutral but the majority simply go one side, I am going to mention Huffingtonpost again simply because it strikes me out as the best example as it's a rather radical liberal thing just as Russia Today is always showed in the opposite light as an example.
I haven't seen a single good headline about Trump on that site , not a single one , you got to be kidding me that's not possible , I'm sure I could find at least a few good things about Lucifer himself and they pretend like there's none at all about a man who isn't that different from the many other billionaires and rich folks who contribute to the democrats on a regular basis and influence their friendly media, do they really think Trump is like the only one who has made stuff in China , or tried to do a tax evasion thing.
For those whose memory serves them they could rewind the tape and remember how Mark Rich , the man who traded illegally with US adversaries and was among the most wanted men by the FBI got a pardon from Bill Clinton in his last days in office and whose wife gave contributions to the Clinton Foundation , how about that isn't that a slap in the face for the US? Oh but guess what, sites like Huffpost really don't want you to focus on those issues.Because focusing on such issues trains your critical thinking , a skill which is dangerous for a modern liberal.
On the other side I haven't seen a single bad headline about Hillary on that site , not one , I've tried , once I almost thought that it has happened but as I started to read the article I quickly understood that's it's just a trick to make them save whatever legitimacy they have left.

This goes even deeper , sure I don't have the evidence to back up my claims here because I don't sit all day copying out photos from news sites but even the photos they put on top of each headline , even those , Trump is always showed with some of his more crazy face mimics , either being angry or looking weird and stupid , always.
Hillary on the other hand is always shown smiling , sometimes with a serious face but one that sends down signs to your brain that she is confident.
Like cmoon isn't anyone seeing this? That is psychological manipulation at it's best , but it still falls short and can be seen because the Americans just don't know how to lie good enough they should learn from the Russians , this has always been their strong side.
Or maybe they don't even try because they do think that the public is "deplorable" enough and they will catch on their bait anyhow.And quite frankly that's the truth.

Now I'm going to get even more hated upon but I want to say that atleast 50% of the times the Dems have attacked Putin and criticized him for being bad and evil and a monster , it;s simply because their strategy was overtaken by the Russians and they lost and failed to Putin's strategy , which has many times proved itself simply smarter and better, yes Vladimir is twisted and maybe a bit evil as his former job required such way of thinking but that doesn't make him bad everytime, it definitely makes him a very competent man when it comes to negotiating and winning because everyone want's something for themselves and you can't play Mother Therese in international politics , sometimes surviving means attacking other interests.Anyhow , no one should get offended or find my remarks offensive , simply because I'm giving my opinion + quite simply the truth , so if someone has a problem with that then all I can say to him is a quote from Jack Nicholson in one of my favorite movies "You can't handle the truth!"

 

[phinds]

Anyhow , no one should get offended or find my remarks offensive , simply because I'm giving my opinion + quite simply the truth ...

No, you are not. You ARE giving your opinion, but you are giving YOUR truth, NOT "quite simply the truth" . To expect others to agree w/ it just because it is your opinion is not going to work. I don't expect anyone to take my opinion as objective truth and neither should you. That's the kind of thinking that created the partisanship that now plagues us.

 

[Salvador]

Well the opinion is when you say how you feel or think about a certain fact , like for example what I think of Trump is an opinion but when i say Trump has this and that or hasn't released his tax returns that is not an opinion those are the facts and they are real and so are true.I don't see why I can't call that the truth or reality.

Much like what I said about the media showing this and that , that part is not my opinion that part is what's going on and anyone can see it but not anyone understands it.Much like Mark Rich's pardon is the truth , a fact.
So as long as I'm not pretending to be the Messiah and offering you salvation I think I haven;t said anything wrong.
I understand you phinds , you just got confused over what I said but I hope you see how I intend it to be and agree it's fine.I don't strive for others to accept my opinion as "the truth" , I don't gain anything from it , atleast not in my current position.Al I'm doing is I'm saying that 2+2=4 in a world were it's accepted to =5 and for some 3 and for some it could equal all the numbers in maths as they don't care. I;m just saying 2+2=4 which is the truth and then I'm elaborating on that truth and that then is my opinion which you are welcomed to deny , rebel against or agree with , anyways it;'s fine with me.
It's not like I have an election to win this fall...

 

[TurtleMeister]

As for the US , some of you said , ok if you applied such voter checking, Hillary would win. Why ? Does that mean the average Trump supporter is a fool? No honestly tell me as I am not from the US and maybe I have gotten something mixed up here although I have a feeling what the answer might be.

I don't think the average Trump supporter is a fool. The key phrase in my post was "according to the media".

 

[phinds]

I understand you phinds , you just got confused over what I said but I hope you see how I intend it to be and agree it's fine.

I would agree that you stated one or two facts (e.g. Clinton's pardon of Rich) but most of what you said in the post I was responding to is your opinion not any kind of objective fact. For example, I agree there is media bias but you overstate the case and seem to be presenting your opinion as fact. Yes, I know YOU think it's a fact, but not everyone will agree.

 

[Evo]

Phinds is correct. Let's remember, stating opinion as fact is not allowed unless the sources for each statement are provided, so let's not go there. Second, mixing opinion with true statements requires the same sources. So, clearly state opinions as opinions, do not mix with "facts", all facts must be backed with appropriate sources.

 

[Salvador]

OK, phinds and Evo , I sure understand your point. Sure media bias ir harder to prove than Bill's written pardon for Rich or any other documented piece of paper.
Opinion:
Not to brag about it here but the media bias case is actually an interesting one , just for curiosity I suggest you folks take some time whenever you have it and simply read the news but not the headlines not even the articles as we all already pretty much know what they are about but read the message between the lines , the photos attached , the overall outline of the article , that's what I do usually , I have gotten so used to it I don't even notice what exactly is that I'm seeing.

As I've said in my earlier post , I don't have any real physical evidence of this and it is hard to have any evidence of this because the news too is much like my posts - some facts and a lot of opinion , So such a mix is really hard to prove or disprove.But you wouldn't say that it's not there and not real.

Fox news for example , they too ride cleverly mixed opinion above many facts , I may agree on many cases with that opinion and so may many others so they don't even have the slightest clue that it might be just an opinion for them it's the truth.
All I wanted to say is that this is the very reason why media is the 4th power apart from the government and why it's been used so heavily by politicians all over the globe.There's this thin line between a fact like "Obama is the president of US " and " Obama is the best president of the US ever"

Although whatever because it's a two way street as much as the media give bias the people who hear that bias want it themselves as each of us want to see the world differently , so the people give feedback and the news just build up on it.Much like the forever ongoing war on drugs , as long as someone will want that distorted vision of reality there will be someone supplying it.

 

[Salvador]

Oh , by the way , even if Trump hasn't supplied his tax returns , isn't the IRS and other government agencies checking them already for possible bad influences and things that are dangerous for a nominee , so technically if there would be some real links that shown Trump's connections in the money form with Russia and Moscow, wouldn't the SS or IRS or anyone already on alert by now ?
Just wondering.
Because apart from any wrongdoing and crime that might appear on those returns what else is there to hide if not the fact that his income may be lower than the likes to shout.

 

[kyphysics]

Why isn't this pay for play stuff illegal?

 

[kyphysics]

Or, is it that you have to show quid pro quo, which is kind of a built in bullet-proof, get-out-of-jail free card?

In that case, anyone can just say, well donor X never asked me for anything specific and I just happened to give donor x some government position, because he or she seemed like a good candidate (despite probably way more qualified people).

 

[Dotini]

Why isn't this pay for play stuff illegal?

IMO, two reasons:
1) It only gives the appearance of impropriety, and is not definitive proof of wrongdoing.
2) Both parties have been doing it for decades, so if it is wrongdoing, both have been implicated and neither wants the practice to end. It is a perfected and accepted form of corruption in the USA.