What if Hillary won?

US GDP Growth Revised Up to 1.4% In Q1

US GDP Growth Revised Higher to 3.1% in Q2 Originally Posted by WTF

Your links don’t work. The last 2qrts were over 3% GDP. According to the link you posted the highest increase since 2015. Plus the hurricanes that hit the US. Trumps first year GDP will be higher than any Obama year. As you would say... “you do know this”!

Give WDF another 4 years, he'll figure it out. You should have seen his work on ASPD.net. Incredible.

C'mon little feller.

Give WDF another 4 years, he'll figure it out. You should have seen his work on ASPD.net. Incredible.

C'mon little feller. Originally Posted by gnadfly

Little Limpy!!!!!

Would the left be throwing Bill under the bus for sexual abuse of women like their doing now? What a cluster fuck it would be. Think of the possibilities!

Your thoughts if any? Originally Posted by bambino

No, cause we wouldn't be SEEING This sexual harassment firestorm..

Nor would we have seen Russiagate, or anything else..

She would have completed weaponizing the Justice Department and State Department by now just like they did back in 1992. Originally Posted by the_real_Barleycorn

Along with damn near every other department/agency!

There would no longer be any sort of justice in this country. Originally Posted by the_real_Barleycorn

As it stands i don't see much justice as is...

We would probably already be angling for a major way of Hillary's choice (like Yemen, Libya, or Syria) because how does a woman prove that she is tough...a good war fought by others. Originally Posted by the_real_Barleycorn

It would certainly be interesting to have seen HOW would she have handled NK..

We would a decidely liberal court after the appointment of Angela Davis to the august body and the resignation of Ruth Buzzi Ginsberg and the appointment of Bill Clinton to the high court. Originally Posted by the_real_Barleycorn

And the Scotus would forevermore be 7 dems to 2 reps..

Yeah, well it’s off to a great start. How do you and Stockman rate the 8 yrs of Obama’s GDP? Originally Posted by bambino

No, it was off to a bad start. It will not be over 3% for the year.


https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/gdp-growth



. Originally Posted by WTF

This just shows that you don’t read your links or you’re stupid. Originally Posted by bambino

US GDP Growth Revised Up to 1.4% In Q1

US GDP Growth Revised Higher to 3.1% in Q2 Originally Posted by WTF

Your links don’t work. The last 2qrts were over 3% GDP. According to the link you posted the highest increase since 2015. Plus the hurricanes that hit the US. Trumps first year GDP will be higher than any Obama year. As you would say... “you do know this”! Originally Posted by bambino

They were from the first link that did work. ...the one you said I did not read.

You dumb fuck. This year will not be over 3% GDP.

That is why I said you were such a jack ass for bringing up quarter GDP results.

Who was President in 2015...you know when those two quarters beat Trumps two quarters?

Again comparing quarters is really stupid...so stupid that you just compared quarters where Obama beat Trumps quarters that you are bragging about!

They were from the first link that did work. ...the one you said I did not read.

You dumb fuck. This year will not be over 3% GDP.

That is why I said you were such a jack ass for bringing up quarter GDP results.

Who was President in 2015...you know when those two quarters beat Trumps two quarters?

Again comparing quarters is really stupid...so stupid that you just compared quarters where Obama beat Trumps quarters that you are bragging about! Originally Posted by WTF

Yeah, Obama was POTUS for 8 years. He had 8 qtrs that reached 3%GDP. The last one is n 2015. Trump inherited less than 2% growth. The first full qtrs under Trump have been 3%. The 4qtr will be over 3% too. You may want to check with our resident odds maker says about that this. I’m betting on Trumps overall GDP will be higher than Obama’s. I’ll also bet that 2017 overall GDP will be higher than any Obama year. You on?

Let's let Dan Greenfield weigh in on the question posed by the title of this thread:

WOULD ANY DEMS BE CONDEMNING BILL CLINTON UNDER PRESIDENT HILLARY?

November 16, 2017 Daniel Greenfield


A simple question with an obvious response.

Lately there's been a rash of tepid sorta condemnations of Bill Clinton. These condemnations coincide with the total end of Hillary's political career. And her rise as a political nuisance whose new fundraising apparatus actually represents a threat to the Dems. And who has just been raked over the coals by former interim DNC head Donna Brazile.

Now picture, President Hillary Clinton in the White House. And Bill, as the First Gentleman, doing his goodwill tour of Paris restaurants and orphanages for teenage girls.

Is there any chance in a million that we would be seeing this?

Nope. And we all know why.

Even the various pieces disclaiming Bill Clinton now all mention in some form that they didn't condemn him then because of Republican attacks. And while that's an inevitable dynamic in a corrupted political system, the bottom line is that Bill was useful.

Today the Clintons are increasingly useless and a problem. Tossing Bill out is a long neglected act of housekeeping.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/point/26...iel-greenfield

Bill Clinton is one of the reasons why she did not win... Originally Posted by WTF

Too bad she didn't realize that before running and making an ass out of herself and the whole Democratic party. What's really amazing is the DNC hasn't learned their lesson. They'll run a similar campaign with an equally toxic candidate and lose again in 2020.

https://youtu.be/KsbY142hG4E

Jim

Too bad she didn't realize that before running and making an ass out of herself and the whole Democratic party. What's really amazing is the DNC hasn't learned their lesson. They'll run a similar campaign with an equally toxic candidate and lose again in 2020.

https://youtu.be/KsbY142hG4E

Jim Originally Posted by Mr MojoRisin

"one of the reasons"?

That's some funny shit right there!

She ran on his coattails, and she claimed he tutored her while she was "in the White House"! She embraced him, and so did the DNC!



and all this time I thought it was the $18,000 the Russians blew on an "anti-Hillary" ad "campaign" in one state!

You repeat yourself all the time. And why would we keep you from showing what a douche-bag you are.
You talk about morals. A person who demonstrates he lacks one the few traits you can show on the internet that gives some measure of proof as to who you claim to be.
A subject that means nothing to trump's base.
Trump said, and his supporters backed him up, no matter what he did his supporters would still vote for him.
So for any discussion anyone would try to have about trump's lack of morals, most trumpys won't admit anything, be it ties to the Russians, sexual assault, money laundering for the Russians or just about anything up to and including shooting someone, matters
You and your ilk have no moral standards. You've been outed by trump and by your base and all you can do to keep from looking like a cocksucking scum-bag is to project your issues.
We can talk about all the scumbags without debating the degree of the sexual offense. We can talk about them all. But trump needs to be in the discussion.
We know you're afraid to discuss trump but maybe you'll grow some balls.

Right.

Higher than the Clintons, yes! Let me repeat myself - hildahag lost to a pussy grabber! What does that tell you about how voters viewed her "morals"? White females preferred Trump by ten percentage points! How many times do I have to repeat that factoid???


Originally Posted by lustylad

You talk about morals. A person who demonstrates he lacks one (sic) the few traits you can show on the internet that gives some measure of proof as to who you claim to be.

Hey munchydick, you don't sound comprehensible tonight. Put the bottle down and try to focus on sentence structure and meaning, ok?


A subject that means nothing to trump's base.
Trump said, and his supporters backed him up, no matter what he did his supporters would still vote for him.

Actually munchy, the quote was "I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn't lose any votes." What he forgot to add was if you were the one taking the bullet, he would GAIN a lot of votes.


So for any discussion anyone would try to have about trump's lack of morals, most trumpys won't admit anything, be it ties to the Russians, sexual assault, money laundering for the Russians or just about anything up to and including shooting someone, matters.

Er munchkin, "trumpy" is singular and "trumpies" is plural, ok? When you get hungry, do you say "I have the munchys"?


You and your ilk have no moral standards. You've been outed by trump and by your base and all you can do to keep from looking like a cocksucking scum-bag is to project your issues.
We can talk about all the scumbags without debating the degree of the sexual offense. We can talk about them all. But trump needs to be in the discussion.
We know you're afraid to discuss trump but maybe you'll grow some balls.

Right.

Afraid to discuss Trump? What the fuck are you drinking now? Trumpies LOVE to talk about Trump. He's their favorite topic. If you want him to be in the discussion, start a thread. Put your legendary research skills to work. I heard he kissed a few women without taking tic-tacs first. Is that true, munch-a-dick-meister? Go find out. Chop chop!
Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

So let's recap "what happened" a year ago... 3 weeks before election day, hildabitch had her spy at NBC leak a video to her mole at ABC wherein trumpy brags about being a pussy grabber. ABC spills the 11-year-old video and it immediately goes viral. The clintonista media keep playing it over and over and over again. Three weeks later, women (they're the ones with pussies) flock to the polls and vote for the pussy grabber!

What does that tell you, munchy? What's the take-away? What say you?

MUNCHY: "You pussies have no moral standards!"

Got it!

You repeat yourself all the time. And why would we keep you from showing what a douche-bag you are.
You talk about morals. A person who demonstrates he lacks one the few traits you can show on the internet that gives some measure of proof as to who you claim to be.
A subject that means nothing to trump's base.
Trump said, and his supporters backed him up, no matter what he did his supporters would still vote for him.
So for any discussion anyone would try to have about trump's lack of morals, most trumpys won't admit anything, be it ties to the Russians, sexual assault, money laundering for the Russians or just about anything up to and including shooting someone, matters
You and your ilk have no moral standards. You've been outed by trump and by your base and all you can do to keep from looking like a cocksucking scum-bag is to project your issues.
We can talk about all the scumbags without debating the degree of the sexual offense. We can talk about them all. But trump needs to be in the discussion.
We know you're afraid to discuss trump but maybe you'll grow some balls.

Right.

Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

Hey AssMuncher, Hillary claims she’s President of Earth 2. Grab a case of Ripple and go join her.

Hey AssMuncher, Hillary claims she’s President of Earth 2. Grab a case of Ripple and go join her. Originally Posted by bambino

#1: She throws Champagne.

Yesterday it was reported that the "new" mantra of HillariousNoMore is that Bill would not have been elected in 1992 had Fox News been around to report on the candidates!!!!!

Something about Fox would have DEBUNKED the "Come-Back Kid" title!

(Bill didn't actually win New Hampshire as the MSM reported!)