"Hillary Clinton as president is the worst scenario for the world", professor says.
 

Was watching an interview with Dutch journalist and professor Karel van Wolferen. Quotes:

"Out of the 3 most popular candidates running for president, Hillary Clinton would be the worst scenario for the world. She is too absorbed in the establishment and will continue the war agenda."

interviewer: "But people who are pro Hillary defend her by saying she has the most experience out of the 3."

"She doesn't have experience. The only thing she is experienced in, is overthrowing governments."

This man has studied this more than crockett and ********** combined times a hundred. He is saying exactly what i have been saying. But please libbies, vote on your beloved war monger. Keep your head in the sand just because there is a D behind this termagants name. :thumbsup

She did this with which governments? Ok then, solved that.

Lybia, Syria, Honduras to name a few where she has had something to do with.

I agree with you that Hilary could possibly do just that, but do you really think Trump or anyone else wouldn't do the exact same thing? Maybe Sanders wouldn't but he is seeming less likely to get the nomination lately.

How i look at it:
- Clinton is neck deep in the corrupt agenda of the last decades which has destroyed the economy and destroyed countries. Nothing will change here.
- Sanders will be too weak, he is under control of lobbyists, and he will budge to the Washington elite's agenda, that's almost a guarantee. So he will continue the corrupt agenda as well.
- Out of all of these candidates, and out of all of the candidates of the last decades, Trump is unique: Not controlled by big money because he has it. He has an own opinion and does not care about political correctness. If he will become president (which will never happen - the establishment will go to extremes to prevent that, not excluding an assasination attempt) he is the only one who might go against the existing agenda. The establishment are worried he cannot be controlled, hence the full blown propaganda assault on him by all meainstream media outlets - which should tell anyone enough to vote for him. The ones who have the control are finally worried and i love it.

So... Someone I've never heard of believes the former Secretary of State is not qualified to be President. LOL, that's funny.

Nah, let's just elect someone with zero political experience.

Obama was a real hope !


:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

Yup, because political experience has always worked out so well right? :1orglaugh
Keep on dreaming, sadly you are the type of person that will never wake up :thumbsup ignorance is bliss

by the way, i love the above sentence.
You interpret it as 'qualified' that she has been a Secretary of State.
While people who have a brain interpret it as being in the corrupt system for so long, so she would be the worst president ever.

Btw have you missed the part about her being a war monger for half her life and aided the shitstorm in the middle east, which has killed thousands and thousands of Americans and even more citizens? But go ahead, vote on 4 more years of that. The future grieving families will thank you later.

Every 4 fucking years we hear the same "Oh, the end of the world is coming. I'm moving to Canada"
She will do fine. Better her than comb over numbnut.

that guy's an anti-american idiot that makes broad sweeping statements he pulls out of his ass and can't prove.

fuck him or her. wtfever it is.

Well I wouldn't exactly call the past lets say four 4 year terms succesful... and yes that's an understatement...

Very creditable guy

The Ukraine, Corrupted Journalism, and the Atlanticist Faith | Global Research - Centre for Research on Globalization

globalresearch seems to agree with him LMAO. You a 'commie' now?

Opinions are like assholes -- everyone has one ...

What happened? I didn't notice any significant impact.

jtfc the guy really is an anti-American communist. the shlock in that article is more proof.

he is spot on about that topic. Not sure where commie comes from, it's just looking at facts. I do not label myself.
It's Soros and the gang, the man who funds 'welcome refugee' campaigns and anti trump riot groups, who loves the Ukraine and wants it in the EU. It has nothing to do with labels, and it has everything to do with corrupt oligarchs who destroy countries.

on this side of the pond we do, because of the mess in the middle east people in my neighboring country get blown to bits now. Several years ago this would be unthinkable and now it's normal.

And you see zero fault of your own? Those were domestic terrorists. Citizens of EU. Most born and raised there. I guess its our fault your governments don't have a back bone.

Ofcourse its our governments fault as well, not denying that. I am always the first to criticize my own spineless government. In fact, Europes governments are the weakest in the world.

not a fan of hillary but we could do worst :2 cents::2 cents::2 cents:

Here's something from the professor of economics who worked in her administration:


Time to Pound My Head Against the Wall Once Again: Archive Entry From Brad DeLong's Webjournal

PS: Ron Paul 2016. :upsidedow

People always THINK they want change, but real change is scary. It's an unknown. We have been designed through thousands of generations to go with what we know as it keeps us the most safe.

Of the three, Hillary is the most KNOWN element. People are afraid of Trump and people are afraid of Sanders. Meanwhile our most likely candidate is under major scrutiny due to illegal things she did AS Secretary of State.

The circus has finally come to town!

As a matter of fact, it seems to have worked out just fine.

Every four years we go through the same crap - "We need change". Because, you know, things are so god damn stinking horrible here in the United States. Every four years they talk about how important the current election is and how "so much is at stake".

We have a 4.9 unemployment rate. Do we really want change?

Still don't grasp what this actually means do you?

we're all supposed to be happy and joyous re: our elected officials and the job they do because, you know, an unemployment statistic.

no one will be worse than Trump.

If anyone truly "doesn't want change," they should be voting for Sanders or Trump. Neither of them will get shit done, there will be a lot of blowback. People complain about the Republicans blocking everything now, watch what happens if either of these two get elected.

No change? Don't vote for Clinton.

I'm not sure I agree that Sanders would be controlled by lobbyists statement, he seems quite clear that he wants to end all that (even a small step forward would be a good thing) but I can't disagree with you that he may come off as weak with regards to other nations anyway.

Trump may not have all the lobbyists money pushing him around if elected but his ego could be far more dangerous if placed at the helm. He's not the type to listen to advisers or surround himself with the smartest people possible, even if he did he'd get rid of them as soon as they had a disagreement. The worst thing any leader can do is surround himself with yes men.

I honestly wish they would put an end to career politicians. There are better, smarter people who would do a much better job at it and it would save people a lot of time and money and wasted time frankly. Shit, it has become such a big deal you even have this canadian asshole chiming in on it.. haha

Hate to break it to you but people with good technical skills and educations are not unemployed (against their will). Try to hire good developers or other technical people.

Fresh out of college with a degree in computer sciences, engineering or in a health care field -- these graduates have no real problems finding good jobs. A kid out of a community college with an AA degree in automotive technical skills and with a state issued mechanic’s licence has no problem finding a decent job.

People over 40 that have low level work skills and cannot retrain are fucked.

Joe Lunchbucket that screwed on the left fender on the assembly line, who drank a 6 pack after work is unemployable now.

Since the housing crash of 2008 residential construction is WAY down -- not the trades-workers fault really -- many are just victims of circumstance but they cannot adapt to the new economy well.

What the hell does Hillary have to do with the unemployment rate -- nothing.

What would be a legitimate reason why someone who is work eligible, who has been working for years, could not retrain? Other than sustaining some kind of life-altering head injury or debilitating disease I see no reason why anyone, 40 or older, or younger, can't pick up a new set of skills or adapt their old ones and find work.... or go into business for themselves. :warning

That means most Americans don't give a shit because its not happening here.

Except for Hillary.