Uhm, yes, I understand it is a right-wing talking point that she's corrupt. But what actual evidence is there that she changes her policy views based on who gives her money? What specific examples of this happening can you point out? barfo
Again, you know how to google and even though google is ultra-blue and drastically skews and controls what news you see, you'll find proof even by sources you have to accept, assuming you aren't just jacking off in a pool of self-loathing lust for Hillary. https://www.google.com/search?q=hillary emails prove pay for play&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8
Sorry, meeting people is not the same thing as changing one's policy positions. Try again, but be careful. Google can and will use whatever you search for against you when they start rounding people up in their 'driverless cars' which are actually mobile gas chambers/incineration machines. barfo
Well, I guess you can switch hands if you get bored. https://www.facebook.com/HillaryForPrison16/?hc_ref=PAGES_TIMELINE
Shooting fish in a barrel, as usual. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...ry-clinton-change-position-same-sex-marriage/
Not clear what you think that shows. Yes, she changed her position on gay marriage. As did most Americans. There's not even a suggestion there that she changed her position as a result of some sort of corruption. barfo
If mere position changes are what we are objecting to here, what about this? That's about as flip-floppy as you can get. barfo
She changed her position like a weathervane. She has demonstrated no conviction. Compared to, say, the Libertarians who nominated a gay man as their first candidate in the 1970s. But you don't like Libertarians. SMH
Like a weathervane suggests that she changed it back and forth multiple times. She didn't do that. Maybe you could say she changed her position like she was in a drift boat on a river or something. I don't know. But still, you are off-topic. The accusation was not flip-floppery, but selling policy positions to the highest bidder. If nominating gays for president was the sole thing I cared about, then yes, that would make the LP my party of choice. barfo
Whichever way the wind blows. She was for TPP. She pushed it. Now that Sanders got some traction running against such things, she's "against" it. If she's elected, I bet she signs something like it, claiming it is somehow fixed. That'll be for money.
And what do you know? http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/terry-mcauliffe-hillary-clinton-tpp-trade-226253 Clinton friend McAuliffe says Clinton will flip on TPP, then walks it back Terry McAuliffe tells POLITICO the Democratic nominee will support a deal with tweaks that Sanders' supporters hate. But the Clinton campaign calls the comments 'flat wrong.' (walks it back, LOL)
Yes, that's called 'being a politician'. It is absolutely true that politicians sometimes switch sides for political reasons. I gave you an example of your Johnson swinging from side to side above. Trump is busy trying to change his position on immigration right now. Do tell. How does Hillary personally benefit from TPP? barfo
Why not by having the Chinese allow her to murder people in their country for sport? I mean as long as we are just making shit up, let's make it entertaining. barfo
I seriously doubt Johnson changed his mind to attract more votes. The others don't matter much. They're just awful.
corporate society depends on all of us giving them our money, their accumulated power is given to them completely voluntarily. its actually their only weakness, besides guillotines. thats why they are constantly trying to create monopolies, where consumers have no choice.
