You mean to tell me that the people she and her husband have been meeting with haven't found the emails she deleted from an illegally used private server following the terrorist attack she lied about!?
Shocking. Absolutely shocking.
So you'd overlook compromising national security because 'she's not anti-gay'.
Trump isn't even sure if he's against gay marriage, your own link makes that clear.
As for the second point, overlooking how unreliably biased your second link is, what the party leaders decide has no bearing on what the politicians and voters want. The only people who care enough about either party to draft up a platofrm are typically borderline-extremists anyways, and it's best to take their input with a grain of salt.
Maybe. If Trump wins, then a shitload of bad stuff will happen. Conversion therapy might become legal, which is really shitty and dude, Hillary sucks. Okay? She's a terrible candidate but she's better than Trump. She's awful. I get that.
How do you from being against gay marriage to being in favor of conversion therapy?
That is way too huge of a leap, for anyone.
You also have yet to provide anything substantial to suggest that Clinton is better than Trump.
Pardon me, I misread something. If you do look at the Trump anti-gay link, it says that he'll considering allowing discrimination against gay people. And let me get this straight: I'm just trying to show why Trump is terrible.
The entire point if this isn't Clinton vs Trump. Its that the nomination was rigged so we are now forced to choose between probably the two most corrupt candidates to be nominated. The DMC never had any intention of allowing Bernie Sanders or anyone else to get the nomination.
Also, she's not the first female nominated. That was Victoria Woodhull over 100 years ago.
Aside from the fact that he has been in the midst of one scandal after another, including being investigated for fraud over the whole Trump "University" debacle, the man has declared bankruptcy multiple times, yet is still ridiculously rich. He has bilked the system he now wants to serve more times and in more ways than we will ever know. He is almost as corrupt as Clinton, except he doesn't have all the blood on his hands (that we know of).
You’re correct regarding Trump U. You are incorrect regarding bankruptcy. Not only do bankruptcy filings have nothing to do with an individual’s corruption, it makes sense that he is still ridiculously rich because Trump himself has never filed for bankruptcy. His corporations have filed for Chapter 11 on four occasions. A corporation is a separate legal entity from its owners, board, and CEO, and as a separate entity, it files bankruptcy under its own name. In Chapter 11 bankruptcies, the owners’ personal assets are not at risk. It’s worth noting that business continues after filing for Chapter 11, and the debt is restructured and reduced.
The primaries are held by parties to decide their presidential nominee. Democrats compete with each other and Republicans with each other, last man standing is the one who runs for president. For the source of what nightshadecat is talking about, just google Debbie Wasserman Schulz. She was head of the Democrat's primary process, and the recent email leak indicated top people there wanted Clinton to win and skewed the process in her favor, and showed the disdain the party had for Sanders and his supporters. Since only Republicans and Democrats ever get elected President, thanks to the process being skewed toward them, the primaries decide the only two likely options.
SMH. Come on Chu, wiki leaks dumped thousands of emails a week ago showing that Debbie Wasserman Shultz colluded with Hillary's people and the media. The resigned because of the scandal and didn't speak as scheduled at the DNC. The DNC allegedly gave her a golden parachute, proving that the powers support her actions. I believe she has since been hired by the H campaign.
Shocking. Absolutely shocking.
Trump isn't even sure if he's against gay marriage, your own link makes that clear.
As for the second point, overlooking how unreliably biased your second link is, what the party leaders decide has no bearing on what the politicians and voters want. The only people who care enough about either party to draft up a platofrm are typically borderline-extremists anyways, and it's best to take their input with a grain of salt.
That is way too huge of a leap, for anyone.
You also have yet to provide anything substantial to suggest that Clinton is better than Trump.
Also, she's not the first female nominated. That was Victoria Woodhull over 100 years ago.