Total Members Voted: 43
Voting closed: November 27, 2016, 06:33:26 AM
I think Hitlery because it just can't picture Drumpf in Office. Like, the image can't be made in my head, it's impossible whereas I CAN picture the female shithead as president.
I say Shillary, because even if Drumpf won, given his goldfish-level attention-span, he wouldn't remember what he ran for in the first place.
Since someone linked you to it on the internet, probably not, but I'm not watching a shitting hour long video to find out... at least summarise the fucking points.
At the end of the day, even with fuzzy information on how corrupt Hillary is, I think it's clear that Drumpf is at the very least equally, and likely considerably more, corrupt. Even if that is your only criteria for voting (ignoring things like one of the candidates having the political alignments of Hitler) the answer should still not be hard to find.At least Drumpf winning would finally disprove all of the Lizard-man conspiracy theories. While it's possible that Clinton could be one of those Reptilian overlords, Drumpf is clearly an angry scrotum in a wig, no kind of reptile.
Is this all true?
Yes, she's a career politician.
For example, the Clinton Foundation is a money laundering scheme to sell influence in the US government to highly unsavory characters across the world. I'm just gonna paste a couple paragraphs but there's no end to their shady businesses, and there's always new stuff coming out. Also it won't matter if she's better than Drumpf when she's in jail for running her State Secretary corruption scheme through her private email server.http://nypost.com/2015/04/12/hillary-clinton-faces-scandal-amid-expectant-presidential-run/"Founded in 2001 as The Clinton Foundation and renamed the Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation in 2013, this ostensible philanthropic concern has become a liability.As reported by the International Business Times last week, while serving as secretary of state, Clinton was lobbied by human rights groups and union leaders to address the Colombian government’s abuse of striking oil workers, some of whom had been threatened at gunpoint by the military. Meanwhile, the oil company in question, Pacific Rubiales, was promising millions to the Clinton Foundation.Hillary’s State Department wound up publicly hailing Colombia’s commitment to human rights reform — and that statement allowed the United States to continue funding the Colombian military.Today, the founder of Pacific Rubiales is a board member of the Clinton Foundation.And as Politico reported last week, a major phosphate company owned by the Moroccan government has just pledged at least $1 million to the foundation. In 2011, Clinton’s State Department assailed Morocco as a corrupt state guilty of “arbitrary arrests and corruption in all branches of government.” Women in Morocco are still subjugated by Islamic rule, yet last September, Hillary Clinton’s public stance on the government had changed.“A vital hub for economic and cultural exchange,” she called it, one that was “in the midst of dramatic changes.”The foundation had stopped accepting money from foreign governments in 2009, when Hillary became secretary of state. When she resigned in 2013, the foundation changed this policy, and it has since taken money from Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Oman."
American defense contractors also donated to the Clinton Foundation while Hillary Clinton was secretary of state and in some cases made personal payments to Bill Clinton for speaking engagements. Such firms and their subsidiaries were listed as contractors in $163 billion worth of Pentagon-negotiated deals that were authorized by the Clinton State Department between 2009 and 2012.The State Department formally approved these arms sales even as many of the deals enhanced the military power of countries ruled by authoritarian regimes whose human rights abuses had been criticized by the department. Algeria, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Oman and Qatar all donated to the Clinton Foundation and also gained State Department clearance to buy caches of American-made weapons even as the department singled them out for a range of alleged ills, from corruption to restrictions on civil liberties to violent crackdowns against political opponents.
A big oil company that stood to lose billions of dollars in an environmental lawsuit funneled generous donations to the Clinton Foundation and a political pet project of Hillary Clinton's while it lobbied the State Department to intervene in the case on its behalf.