Posted on Apr 19, 2019
Do you believe that Russia would have benefited more from a Hillary Administration than President Trump's?
2.47K
215
87
17
17
0
There seems to be the consensus that Russia would benefit more from a Trump presidency. I don't see why anyone would believe this. Russia had a long standing relationship with Hillary during which they profited greatly (and so did she and her husband). They had no political experience with President Trump prior to his election. None whatsoever...
Russia
Hillary Clinton
Donald Trump
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 20
9
9
0
Yes.
Hillary is an ideologue and Trump is a pragmatist. Hillary had a long track record in politics making her much more predictable. Obama was soft on Russia, no reason to believe that Obama's Sec of State (Hillary) would be any different. Trump, on the other hand, was an unknown and therefore less predictable.
Russia cannot be happy that the US economy is booming and is now the world leader in energy production. Don't think that would have happened under a Hillary Administration.
Hillary is an ideologue and Trump is a pragmatist. Hillary had a long track record in politics making her much more predictable. Obama was soft on Russia, no reason to believe that Obama's Sec of State (Hillary) would be any different. Trump, on the other hand, was an unknown and therefore less predictable.
Russia cannot be happy that the US economy is booming and is now the world leader in energy production. Don't think that would have happened under a Hillary Administration.
(9)
(0)
CMSgt (Join to see)
I was hoping to end on, 'we can agree to disagree'. Nope.
"Are you implying by your rebuttal question that the Soviet Union Crumbled because their economy vastly outperformed ours?" I didn't say that you did. I was implying the exact opposite.
"The Soviet Union learned that truth in a very hard fashion." Exactly my point...we agree. Do you think they want a repeat? Yes, that is a question. My point in my original post was (because it is obviously not clear to you); America strong - Good, Russia weak - good. Obama dropped the ball in this regard and I believe Hillary would have done the same. The jury is still out on Trump.
When I say hoax, I'm referring to the political assassination attempt of the President of the United States. As confirmed by Muller.
The Russians tried to interfere with our election? No shit! We do it too. It's called reality which this county seems to be in short supply at the moment. The Muller Report does provide insight into Russia's interference and we can only hope our government develops proactive mitigation strategies for future elections. The rest of the report is political garbage. You, my friend, are so down in the weeds you can't see the forest through the trees. Ironic you keep referring to the term...cherrypicked.
BTW: "That they tampered with our elections on a massive scale is undeniable." "massive scale" LOL!
The massive interference in U.S. elections is from the U.S. corporate sector, who pretty much buy our elections. Since the 1970s, when the neoliberal assault began, the number of lobbyists in Congress has skyrocketed. A normal representative in Congress now spends several hours a day just talking to donors to try to get funds for the next election. Meanwhile, the lobbyists are meeting with his staff to try to bring all of their huge resources which overwhelm the staff and pretty much write the legislation. - Noam Chomsky
None of my business but why SGT (Anonymous)? Yes, another question. I hope you're not a Russian bot. I see the green verification but the Russian's have proven to be quite agile these days. You seem intelligent, why hide behind your comments? We are all brothers and sisters here at RP.
"Are you implying by your rebuttal question that the Soviet Union Crumbled because their economy vastly outperformed ours?" I didn't say that you did. I was implying the exact opposite.
"The Soviet Union learned that truth in a very hard fashion." Exactly my point...we agree. Do you think they want a repeat? Yes, that is a question. My point in my original post was (because it is obviously not clear to you); America strong - Good, Russia weak - good. Obama dropped the ball in this regard and I believe Hillary would have done the same. The jury is still out on Trump.
When I say hoax, I'm referring to the political assassination attempt of the President of the United States. As confirmed by Muller.
The Russians tried to interfere with our election? No shit! We do it too. It's called reality which this county seems to be in short supply at the moment. The Muller Report does provide insight into Russia's interference and we can only hope our government develops proactive mitigation strategies for future elections. The rest of the report is political garbage. You, my friend, are so down in the weeds you can't see the forest through the trees. Ironic you keep referring to the term...cherrypicked.
BTW: "That they tampered with our elections on a massive scale is undeniable." "massive scale" LOL!
The massive interference in U.S. elections is from the U.S. corporate sector, who pretty much buy our elections. Since the 1970s, when the neoliberal assault began, the number of lobbyists in Congress has skyrocketed. A normal representative in Congress now spends several hours a day just talking to donors to try to get funds for the next election. Meanwhile, the lobbyists are meeting with his staff to try to bring all of their huge resources which overwhelm the staff and pretty much write the legislation. - Noam Chomsky
None of my business but why SGT (Anonymous)? Yes, another question. I hope you're not a Russian bot. I see the green verification but the Russian's have proven to be quite agile these days. You seem intelligent, why hide behind your comments? We are all brothers and sisters here at RP.
(1)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
CMSgt (Join to see) - we can agree to disagree. Ill skip to the last portion, considering you bring it up, and this entire thread serves as a good example.
Why SGT (Anonymous)? Is it relevant? If my name was public, would that change your mind about what I wrote? I hope you’re not a Russian bot. Russian social media bots/hackers/influencers generally try to blend in and be as inconspicuous as possible. Create full, engaged profiles. People are more likely to believe what others say if they feel a common bond with them, even on a subconscious level. Having been on RP for a while now, not having a public profile certainly isn’t the norm. And when folks here disagree, it almost always turns to the tune of “well you’re anonymous, so you must be a Russian bot/ you never served/ you’re a fake/ fill in the blank insult”
Indeed, I’m verified. But we’re all brothers and sisters here on the Point? I respectfully disagree. Read through some of the comments on this entire thread. Some of the highlights are ‘c*cksucker’, ‘commie b*stard’, ‘tough guy b*tch’, piece of sh*t’, and the list can go on. These aren’t used in jestful, brotherly tones.
In other threads, I saw a guy actually post another users’ work address/phone number in response to some nonsense argument in a thread. RP has delved into a forum for folks who missed the bus with FB, Instagram and Snapchat. They didn’t grow up utilizing social media, and now they have their own platform, just for Vets, they use it like a 23yr old kid drinking tequila for the first time (not very well).
I’m not here for networking or making pals. Honestly, if the larger group is an indication of the individuals, I don’t want to be pals with anyone here. Simply, I enjoy trading ideas with fellow veterans. It lets me stay a bit closer to the Army, even though I’m no longer active.
Anonymity is not an indicator of good or bad information. As the CG once told a LTC who tried to chew me up because I was ragged looking/unshaven during a briefing, “I don’t care if he reads off a used pizza box. He’s the only NCO at this table. Do you think that’s an accident?” Point is, good information is good information. The source is irrelevant.
Don’t fall into the common fallacy (and painful RP trend) of disregarding the information by discrediting the source, simply due to anonymity. I don’t hide behind anything. I own anything I write.
Sorry to get long winded. Best of luck.
Why SGT (Anonymous)? Is it relevant? If my name was public, would that change your mind about what I wrote? I hope you’re not a Russian bot. Russian social media bots/hackers/influencers generally try to blend in and be as inconspicuous as possible. Create full, engaged profiles. People are more likely to believe what others say if they feel a common bond with them, even on a subconscious level. Having been on RP for a while now, not having a public profile certainly isn’t the norm. And when folks here disagree, it almost always turns to the tune of “well you’re anonymous, so you must be a Russian bot/ you never served/ you’re a fake/ fill in the blank insult”
Indeed, I’m verified. But we’re all brothers and sisters here on the Point? I respectfully disagree. Read through some of the comments on this entire thread. Some of the highlights are ‘c*cksucker’, ‘commie b*stard’, ‘tough guy b*tch’, piece of sh*t’, and the list can go on. These aren’t used in jestful, brotherly tones.
In other threads, I saw a guy actually post another users’ work address/phone number in response to some nonsense argument in a thread. RP has delved into a forum for folks who missed the bus with FB, Instagram and Snapchat. They didn’t grow up utilizing social media, and now they have their own platform, just for Vets, they use it like a 23yr old kid drinking tequila for the first time (not very well).
I’m not here for networking or making pals. Honestly, if the larger group is an indication of the individuals, I don’t want to be pals with anyone here. Simply, I enjoy trading ideas with fellow veterans. It lets me stay a bit closer to the Army, even though I’m no longer active.
Anonymity is not an indicator of good or bad information. As the CG once told a LTC who tried to chew me up because I was ragged looking/unshaven during a briefing, “I don’t care if he reads off a used pizza box. He’s the only NCO at this table. Do you think that’s an accident?” Point is, good information is good information. The source is irrelevant.
Don’t fall into the common fallacy (and painful RP trend) of disregarding the information by discrediting the source, simply due to anonymity. I don’t hide behind anything. I own anything I write.
Sorry to get long winded. Best of luck.
(0)
(0)
CMSgt (Join to see)
The bot comment was tongue and check. I believe we are all brothers and sisters here on RP -- including you. That's one of the main reasons I frequent this site. Like it or not, being anonymous makes people wonder what you have to hide. I don't know you, have not walked in your shoes, and I'm sure you have your reasons. I tend to judge people not by their words, but by their actions.
(0)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
CMSgt (Join to see) - I’ve got nothing to hide. But good, respectful information from ‘anonymous’ is vastly more relevant than uninformed/disrespectful garbage from anyone who proudly stamps their name on it.
Unfortunately, disagreements on RP often turn into downright shameful behavior. Folks writing stuff that they wouldn’t remotely have the b*lls to say in person.
These are actual questions. Would my name and photo change your mind about anything I’ve written? (Or any anonymous RP member, in general). Do you ever assume people (especially any you happen to agree with) might have fake name/photo/info posted?
You tend to judge folks not by their words, but by their actions. Fair enough. Is the action of keeping a profile private then inherently untrustworthy? Unfortunately, on RP, words are all you can really go by, and it’s been my experience that the most poorly behaved folks happen to have fully displayed profiles.
Unfortunately, disagreements on RP often turn into downright shameful behavior. Folks writing stuff that they wouldn’t remotely have the b*lls to say in person.
These are actual questions. Would my name and photo change your mind about anything I’ve written? (Or any anonymous RP member, in general). Do you ever assume people (especially any you happen to agree with) might have fake name/photo/info posted?
You tend to judge folks not by their words, but by their actions. Fair enough. Is the action of keeping a profile private then inherently untrustworthy? Unfortunately, on RP, words are all you can really go by, and it’s been my experience that the most poorly behaved folks happen to have fully displayed profiles.
(0)
(0)
8
8
0
One of the best threads on RP. Classic liberal mental illness on display. Hopefully these folks can get to the VA for their meds.
(8)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
I have a rule to always listen to and follow the advice of 1SGs but Sweeny’s Meltdown is better than anything on Comedy Central. I take his comments as pure humor. 1SG John Millan
(2)
(0)
7
7
0
HRC Did Not Have an administration... BHO Did and HRC was One of the Key Players In a Career Criminal Political Crime Spree... They are still trying to cover their 4th POC's
(7)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google