13 Full Minutes Of Hillary's Lies

[eohrnberger]

You're saying I'm taking Trump's claims out of context? Really? I did watch the interviews - they were claims, not comments, presented not as suppositions or suggestions, but as fact.

And when it comes to Hillary's lies, all you need do to find them in text would be to Google "list hillary lies"...and then you can show me which - if any - of her lies were anywhere near as egregious as Trump's...because IMO even her "sniper" lie wasn't as bad. Why? Because it was not divisive to American society as a whole. Trump's were, and egregiously so.

Meh. This can go back and forth as long as we have strength and will.

Trump's comments / claims are bombast and demagoguing (and even so, many illegal immigrants from Mexico are in fact committing crimes, violent (rape, murder, drugs) and otherwise, estimated at being 30% of the court cases [I think it was] ).

Hillary was lying for her own advancement, and to cover her own ass from something else (usually the consequences of her own actions).

There's a big difference in that.

 

[cpwill]

Thanks, I know what a bubble and an anecdote is. And I've given you my reason for why I believe that majority exists.

Yes. I was pointing out that your reason is illogical. The data shows that - among Democrats - more want Hillary to be their candidate than Bernie.

I would prefer Bernie. I think his policies are insane, but at least the man is fundamentally honest. I would prefer anyone but Trump. But the data also shows that more Republican voters wanted Trump than any of the other 16 chuckleheads who started out.


The People Are Stupid, Cardinal. They Make Bad Decisions.

 

[Glen Contrarian]

Meh. This can go back and forth as long as we have strength and will.

Trump's comments / claims are bombast and demagoguing (and even so, many illegal immigrants from Mexico are in fact committing crimes, violent (rape, murder, drugs) and otherwise, estimated at being 30% of the court cases [I think it was] ).

Hillary was lying for her own advancement, and to cover her own ass from something else (usually the consequences of her own actions).

There's a big difference in that.

"30 percent of court cases"? I think you'd better check your sources. According to the not-exactly-a-friend-of-liberals Wall Street Journal:

A separate IPC paper from 2007 explains that this is not a function of well-behaved high-skilled immigrants from India and China offsetting misdeeds of Latin American newcomers. The data show that “for every ethnic group without exception, incarceration rates among young men are lowest for immigrants,” according to the report. “This holds true especially for the Mexicans, Salvadorans, and Guatemalans who make up the bulk of the undocumented population.”

It also holds true in states with large populations of illegal residents. A 2008 report by the Public Policy Institute of California found that immigrants are underrepresented in the prison system. “The incarceration rate for foreign-born adults is 297 per 100,000 in the population, compared [with] 813 per 100,000 for U.S.-born adults,” the study concludes. “The foreign-born, who make up roughly 35% of California’s adult population, constitute 17% of the state prison population.”

High-profile incidents, like the recent arrest of a Mexican national in the horrific shooting death of a young woman in San Francisco, can give the impression that immigrants are more likely to commit violent crimes. But the alleged killer is no more representative of Mexican immigrants than Dylann Roof is representative of white people.

Every immigrant here illegally has already broken a law, though that doesn’t mean they are predisposed to crime. In a 2005 paper, the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago reported that more recently arrived immigrants are even less crime-prone than their predecessors. In 1980 the incarceration rate of foreign nationals was about one percentage point below natives. A decade later that had fallen to a little more than a percentage point, and by 2000 it was almost three percentage points lower.

And from the Heritage Foundation's own Cato Institute:

Reid et al. looked at a sample of 150 Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs) and found that levels of recent immigration had a statistically significant negative effect on homicide rates but no effect on property crime rates. They wrote, “it appears that anti-immigrant sentiments that view immigrants as crime prone are not only inaccurate at the micro-level, they are also inaccurate at the macro-level … increased immigration may actually be beneficial in terms of lessening some types of crimes.” Wadsworth found that cities with greater growth in immigrant or new immigrant populations between 1990 and 2000 tended to have steeper decreases in homicide and robbery rates.

So...you need to check your sources, because the claims of illegal immigrants causing crime rates are not just flatly false, but the opposite is true - greater levels of immigrants (illegal and otherwise) tend to DECREASE the crime rates.

 

[eohrnberger]

"30 percent of court cases"? I think you'd better check your sources. According to the not-exactly-a-friend-of-liberals Wall Street Journal:

A separate IPC paper from 2007 explains that this is not a function of well-behaved high-skilled immigrants from India and China offsetting misdeeds of Latin American newcomers. The data show that “for every ethnic group without exception, incarceration rates among young men are lowest for immigrants,” according to the report. “This holds true especially for the Mexicans, Salvadorans, and Guatemalans who make up the bulk of the undocumented population.”

It also holds true in states with large populations of illegal residents. A 2008 report by the Public Policy Institute of California found that immigrants are underrepresented in the prison system. “The incarceration rate for foreign-born adults is 297 per 100,000 in the population, compared [with] 813 per 100,000 for U.S.-born adults,” the study concludes. “The foreign-born, who make up roughly 35% of California’s adult population, constitute 17% of the state prison population.”

High-profile incidents, like the recent arrest of a Mexican national in the horrific shooting death of a young woman in San Francisco, can give the impression that immigrants are more likely to commit violent crimes. But the alleged killer is no more representative of Mexican immigrants than Dylann Roof is representative of white people.

Every immigrant here illegally has already broken a law, though that doesn’t mean they are predisposed to crime. In a 2005 paper, the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago reported that more recently arrived immigrants are even less crime-prone than their predecessors. In 1980 the incarceration rate of foreign nationals was about one percentage point below natives. A decade later that had fallen to a little more than a percentage point, and by 2000 it was almost three percentage points lower.

And from the Heritage Foundation's own Cato Institute:

Reid et al. looked at a sample of 150 Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs) and found that levels of recent immigration had a statistically significant negative effect on homicide rates but no effect on property crime rates. They wrote, “it appears that anti-immigrant sentiments that view immigrants as crime prone are not only inaccurate at the micro-level, they are also inaccurate at the macro-level … increased immigration may actually be beneficial in terms of lessening some types of crimes.” Wadsworth found that cities with greater growth in immigrant or new immigrant populations between 1990 and 2000 tended to have steeper decreases in homicide and robbery rates.

So...you need to check your sources, because the claims of illegal immigrants causing crime rates are not just flatly false, but the opposite is true - greater levels of immigrants (illegal and otherwise) tend to DECREASE the crime rates.

No sources. Something I thought I had heard in passing, but apparently it wasn't correct. Withdrawn.

 

[Fearandloathing]

And in both cases, you are taking those comments out of context. I'd suggest that you take the time to view the related videos. Might help you more than your speed reading. With all due respect.

I would have to say this is pretty un-ambiguous.

[video]ing.com/videos/search?q=trump+on+muslims+dancing+in+the+streets&qpvt=trump+on+muslims+dancing+in+the+streets&view=detail&mid=4CC7CEC1BB54D961DF084CC7CEC1BB54D961DF08&FORM=VRDGAR[/video]

Whether it happened or not he's on record as having seen it

 

[Glen Contrarian]

No sources. Something I thought I had heard in passing, but apparently it wasn't correct. Withdrawn.

I'm impressed, and gratified. It's a rare thing to see people in political forums admit to any error - most people just don't seem to have that much courage - you are very much the exception to the rule. Bravo Zulu to you, friend!

 

[eohrnberger]

I'm impressed, and gratified. It's a rare thing to see people in political forums admit to any error - most people just don't seem to have that much courage - you are very much the exception to the rule. Bravo Zulu to you, friend!

Why thank you Glen. I appreciate that. Back at cha'