AlohaHuskers

Trump is absolutely slamming her.

If these polls are supposedly accurate, why can Hillary only pull a couple hundred people to her rallies while Trump routinely brings in 20-30,000+? Everyone should do themselves a favor. Don't trust anything in MSM. Nothing. Look at trending on Facebook. Several thousand people are talking about Trump's audio tape, but well over a million are talking about wikileaks. Most people aren't stupid enough to consider voting for Hillary, but unfortunately, those people are still out there.

Haha! I think I'm one of few that understands what you're saying here...

About the Wall Street speeches? I read them and see nothing of particular interest, other than I feel a little bit better that Clinton understands how finance actually works and how important it is to economic prosperity. I just wish she'd explain it to her left wing supporters. So none of the following bothers you? -Admitting she works for wall Street -Admitting that she tells people what they want to hear so she can win votes and has a different stance than she says -Saying her dream is a world of open borders and one government with free and open trade -conversing about how she understands the influx of Muslim immigrants will cause America to topple There's much more in the emails, but you have to understand what you're looking for.

So is everyone ignoring the WikiLeaks publications from the past couple days or...

You can try to discredit business success with your insecurity and lack of understanding, but one does not simply luck their way into a multi billion dollar real estate empire. Sorry, just didn't happen.

Politifact is biased. Brietbart told me so.Politifact is undeniably left-leaning. If only because of the word 'fact' Just because it has the word in the site name does not make it so.

Marijuana, absolutely. I just can't get on board with legalizing ALL drugs.

Since it's worth everyone seeing. https://twitter.com/GeorgeTakei/status/782974209085542400 Thanks - for some reason my internet is "a loser" today. Trump would hate that. People criticizing Trump over losing a bunch of money one year and using legal deductions on his taxes so he doesn't have to pay any obviously don't know anything about business... Or success.

Politifact is biased. Brietbart told me so. Politifact is undeniably left-leaning.

Pence for the win, not even close.

And Julian Assange is supposedly getting set to release something pretty earth-shattering this week about her as well... Stay tuned...

People aren't just up in arms over controversial words. Trump has equal or great amounts of corruption, incompetence, arrogance, etc. No. He does not. The worst thing against him in this election is him not paying the companies that he contracts to do his construction jobs and other various things. And that's not pretty, and there are no quality excuses for that. But if you truly believe that is equal or greater to pay-for-play, embezzlement, stealing White House furniture, threatening victims of her husband's sexual assaults and rapes, collaborating to rig the primary, the email scandal, Benghazi, etc.... WOW....

While he is definitely worthy of some criticism over his tact, the idea that people are so up-in-arms about some controversial words while looking the other way with Clinton's myriad of issues such as corruption, incompetence, arrogance, etc. is perhaps the most troubling thing in our country right now. So many of the very things that HRC ought to receive extreme criticism for (and much worse than criticism given her record) are simply swept under the rug because her 700+ staff members help her sound "polished" behind a podium.

True. Her covering up for him and threatening the women he did it to might. The troubling thing about this whole thing is this: This scandal only brushes the surface of the Clintons' corruption. And yet people continue to make excuses for her because "at least she's not a racist, sexist, bigot, homophobe." (Even though those things are more true about her than they are about DJT)..... lol. Do you deny that she has done these things?

Thanks for joining us Aloha. When you say "his policies" are what we need, what exactly are you referring to? I could probably echo BIGREDIOWAN with the concern about how he'd handle foreign relations. But my view into his life and how he's handled his business interactions tell me that he's much more... I guess most people would say "reasonable-sounding" behind closed doors in meetings. When he's on stage and on TV, the entire reason he says some of the controversial things he's said is to get attention drawn to him. He has literally owned the media for the past year with how he makes them cover him. First off, the whole "A man you can bait with a tweet" ordeal is such utter fear-mongering BS coming from the Dems. I trust DJT 10000000% more than Hillary War-monger Clinton with them. So that part of foreign relations, I am not worried about. I also think his policy of not playing police to the world is something I've been saying for a lot of years about the US, as playing police for decades has caused a lot of hatred toward us and has cost us immense amounts of money on military spending. I encourage everyone to actually take a look and see the REAL policies he's proposing instead of taking CNN's word - or worse, the Washington Post... https://www.donaldjtrump.com/policies/ Why didn't Trump showcase his "reasonable sounding" side during the debate? It was the perfect opportunity for him to do that. The better questions is this: Why do people put so much weight on a debate instead of actually looking at the things that really matter? You know, like... What are they going to do to lower the national debt? To do away with corruption in government? To allow creation of REAL opportunity for citizens? To allow citizens their freedoms that are declared in the constitution? To fix our terrible education system? To stop the rampant illegal immigration to our country? To protect us from our enemies, which at this time happens to be radical Islamic terrorism? People get so caught up in how things sound instead of what they ought to be focusing on. Watching the debate, a neutral observer would probably say that Hillary won because she was indeed very polished in what she was saying. But if someone is truly educated on the issues and what she is proposing for our country, they'd realize that all she is is a polished turd - a corrupt polished turd that says terrific things (which are extremely vague, BTW) but will likely do the opposite once elected when her Super PACs and big donors pay her off.

So would you say that you watch the Clinton News Network more or less than 8 hours a day?...

In almost all cases, "Politically correct" is a phrase used by those who are mad when it's pointed out that what they are saying is stupid, cruel, racist, sexist, or bigoted in some other way. If the vote has been influenced by people who are not okay with those things, we're better off for it. That would be a valid point if it were valid.

Thanks for joining us Aloha. When you say "his policies" are what we need, what exactly are you referring to? I could probably echo BIGREDIOWAN with the concern about how he'd handle foreign relations. But my view into his life and how he's handled his business interactions tell me that he's much more... I guess most people would say "reasonable-sounding" behind closed doors in meetings. When he's on stage and on TV, the entire reason he says some of the controversial things he's said is to get attention drawn to him. He has literally owned the media for the past year with how he makes them cover him. First off, the whole "A man you can bait with a tweet" ordeal is such utter fear-mongering BS coming from the Dems. I trust DJT 10000000% more than Hillary War-monger Clinton with them. So that part of foreign relations, I am not worried about. I also think his policy of not playing police to the world is something I've been saying for a lot of years about the US, as playing police for decades has caused a lot of hatred toward us and has cost us immense amounts of money on military spending. I encourage everyone to actually take a look and see the REAL policies he's proposing instead of taking CNN's word - or worse, the Washington Post... https://www.donaldjtrump.com/policies/

True. Her covering up for him and threatening the women he did it to might. The troubling thing about this whole thing is this: This scandal only brushes the surface of the Clintons' corruption. And yet people continue to make excuses for her because "at least she's not a racist, sexist, bigot, homophobe." (Even though those things are more true about her than they are about DJT).....

You have to hand it to the PC police. They've influenced a lot of votes this election cycle with that narrative, and it's too bad that so many people have bought into it.

Having a presidential candidate that is openly sexist, racist, misogynistic, a pathological liar, etc. etc. etc., and the fact that Republicans Democrats are putting up with it, is a pretty big issue to focus on. Oh look at that, it applies just as much (probably much more...) this way.

Hey, new to the board, but I've read anonymously for a long time. Wanted to chime in on this one. Two questions: 1. Who do you respect enough, that if they took a strong public stance against Trump you would listen and reconsider? No one. I'm well researched and know exactly what I'm voting for. 2. Is there anything that he could say or do between now and election day to change your support of him? Probably. What that something is? Who knows. But his stance on so many issues in my view are much needed for quite some time now in government. He's not a politician. He doesn't choose his words carefully. He comes with his baggage. The plain and simple fact is that his policies are exactly what this country needs in order to stop the downward spiral, or at the very least, slow it down. One thing is for certain. There is a candidate for the Democratic party that I would not vote for if she were the only option available.