If Hillary Clinton wins, it's over for America

[pete98146]

She will never be president. She has no charisma, does not look presidential and has no stamina either. She's not fit for that kind of office at all.

I think she stands a very good chance of succeeding Obama. If she wins it will be for all the wrong reasons. I think the women in this country want representation and this alone worries me. I also think folks are willing to overlook Hilary's sour puss personality because her "husband" does such of good job of balancing her image. People will be more willing to vote for her knowing that the get the "Clinton Package" and this just be enough to carry the vote to victory.

I also think that the Republican Party has an identity crisis going on right now. A lot of Republicans are trending towards a Libertarian viewpoint but the Republican politicians have been slow to make this adjustment. Too many of us Libertarians have no clear cut (because they are not backed by the Elite) which bodes well for the Democratic Party.

[Rzhayutik]

Hillary Clinton might win, if America doesn't fall during Obama's reign. Maybe tomorrow the market falls and the US$ gets defaultet.

[Winston]

Dont you guys hate Hillary Clinton? Is she really running for president? Gosh. Shes so ugly, wicked and twisted. The sight of her makes me puke. Looking at her is like looking at Medusa... makes me feel like turning to stone! She doesnt even look feminine. More like a lesbian dyke filled with hate for man and God and all thats natural and wholesome. Disgusting.

Why does a yucky monster creature like her exist? Id rather have the wicked witch of the west from Wizard of Oz be president than Hillary Clinton. Even that witch is more natural and normal looking than Hillary Clinton is! How did Bill Clinton ever sleep with such a gross monster? Yuck! Poor fellow. He must have gone through hell. No wonder he cheated on her. Anyone would.

So if Hillary became president, what would Bill Clinton be? First gentleman? Lol. What a p***y he would become. Lol.

[Winston]

Would you guys rather have sex with Hillary Clinton or a blow up sex doll? Lol. How about hillary clinton or a mannequin? Lol. Or hillary clinton or your hand? Lol

If someone gave you $1,000 dollars to have sex with Hillary Clinton, would you take it? How about $10,000 dollars? Lol. I wonder if anyone has sex with her. Lol.

[Rock]

Would you guys rather have sex with Hillary Clinton or a blow up sex doll? Lol. How about hillary clinton or a mannequin? Lol. Or hillary clinton or your hand? Lol

If someone gave you $1,000 dollars to have sex with Hillary Clinton, would you take it? How about $10,000 dollars? Lol. I wonder if anyone has sex with her. Lol.

Disagree in principle. As far as sex appeal is concerned for me, Hillary's only problem is age. She's already 68.

Unlike many women in power political or corporate positions, Hillary is starting from an attractive base.

1. She's pretty tall, about 5'7".

2. She was blessed with nice curves in her youth and middle age.

3. In youth, she had a very alluring cute nerdy look facially.

4. From 35-45, her face was still attractive in more of a power woman MILF sorta style.

5. Both 3 and 4 inspire lust in me.

a. The idea of being dominated by an attractive power woman is a big turn on.

b. Likewise, the thought of being with her 20 something nerdy version with great curves is also exciting to me tho in a slightly different way.

6. No, I would never ever her want her to be President of USA lol.

[droid]

Yeah she was kind of hot

[Hero]

If it comes down to Clinton vs. Trump, I'm outta here.

[Ghost]

.

[MattHanson1990]

If it comes down to Clinton vs. Trump, I'm outta here.

So am I. Things will especially be bad with Clinton in office because more misandrist laws will be signed. As I mentioned in another post, she will sign a law banning single men from traveling abroad to find girlfriends/wives because feminists see that as "sex tourism". And there will also be even worse unemployment rates for men than there are now. More jobs will be outsourced once the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement goes into effect. The jobs that aren't getting outsourced are either going to women or getting automated.

Now is the time to take action because there aren't enough lifeboats for everyone on board this sinking ship.

[Hero]

As I mentioned in another post, she will sign a law banning single men from traveling abroad to find girlfriends/wives because feminists see that as "sex tourism".

Do you have a link to this? How exactly would the law prevent this?

[droid]

As I mentioned in another post, she will sign a law banning single men from traveling abroad to find girlfriends/wives because feminists see that as "sex tourism".

Do you have a link to this? How exactly would the law prevent this?

Not exactly what Matt is extrapolating to, but there is annoying crap like this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internati ... lation_Act

"
The International Marriage Broker Regulation Act of 2005 (Subtitle D of Title VIII (Sec.831-834) of United States Public Law 109-162), or IMBRA, codified at 8 U.S.C. § 1375a(d), is a United States federal statute that requires background checks for all marriage visa sponsors and limits serial visa applications. Additionally, the law requires background checks for US citizens using marriage brokerage services focused primarily on providing dating services between US citizens or residents and foreign nationals for a fee. The impetus for its introduction were two cases (including the Susanna Blackwell case in 1995 and the Anastasia King case in 2000) in which foreign women had been abused and eventually murdered by men who had used a K-1 fiancée visa issued by the US State Department to bring them to the United States. In the King case, the husband had physically abused a previous foreign bride before murdering Anastasia.[1] King had met Anastasia through his own advertisement in a Moscow newspaper (not through an international marriage broker). In the Blackwell case, the husband had a clean record, therefore IMBRA would not have prevented her murder. It was intended to stop abuse of mail order brides by prospective husbands with criminal histories. IMBRA met with opposition from international dating companies when it was first introduced. Some industry executives claim the industry has grown to appreciate it to ensure the safety of its female clients.[2]

We know it's do-gooder bulshit, and obviously the underlying agendas are kind of impossible to prove

I had to file that on VC to continue receiving messages. Of course you could say if you are a decent guy you shouldn't find anything wrong with it, but it's not inconceivable to have a gradual progress into the kind of thing Matt is commenting.

[S_Parc]

Fellas, not everyone can look like Raquel Welch in her 70s ...



Seriously, the number of superwomen per generation is rather low. Darn, if I were on social security, this would be a dream gal

[MattHanson1990]

As I mentioned in another post, she will sign a law banning single men from traveling abroad to find girlfriends/wives because feminists see that as "sex tourism".

Do you have a link to this? How exactly would the law prevent this?

It's just my theory, but I have a feeling with Hillary in office and a democrat-controlled congress, it will get increasingly harder for young single men to escape. Forces are pushing down on men more than ever before, and I think it's because Toronto feminism is already plaguing the US. Right now the US isn't as bad as Toronto, but it's headed in that direction.

I can see these other scenarios occurring in the US when Hillary is president and are currently happening in Toronto:

- there will affirmative action laws for jobs to pay women 6 figures while men get ejected from the workforce more rapidly
- female schoolteachers bringing dildos to school to teach students sex ed will be considered acceptable
- criticizing feminism can get you in trouble with the law
- you can get arrested just for having nightmares

[Winston]

As I mentioned in another post, she will sign a law banning single men from traveling abroad to find girlfriends/wives because feminists see that as "sex tourism".

Do you have a link to this? How exactly would the law prevent this?

The law can't prevent men from traveling abroad or moving abroad, for whatever reason. But they can limit the number of foreign brides that come into America or block you from bringing in a foreign bride. However, why would you want to do that? Our goal is to move overseas. Why bring a foreign bride to such a dysfunctional toxic country? If there's something wrong with your country, then why bring more people to it?

Of course you could say if you are a decent guy you shouldn't find anything wrong with it, but it's not inconceivable to have a gradual progress into the kind of thing Matt is commenting.

That's right. A lot of things that start out looking good are just trojan horses that get worse. For example, women's equal rights become equal power and eventually gave superior power to women. Gay rights may someday follow the same path, first equal rights, then equal power and end up in superior power. The hippie movement in the 60's started out as being anti-war and anti-conformity. But then it became a movement to degenerate basic morals in the US and cultural decay. So even that was a trojan horse. Likewise, this new law could be a trojan horse too.

[MattHanson1990]

As I mentioned in another post, she will sign a law banning single men from traveling abroad to find girlfriends/wives because feminists see that as "sex tourism".

Do you have a link to this? How exactly would the law prevent this?

The law can't prevent men from traveling abroad or moving abroad, for whatever reason. But they can limit the number of foreign brides that come into America or block you from bringing in a foreign bride. However, why would you want to do that? Our goal is to move overseas. Why bring a foreign bride to such a dysfunctional toxic country? If there's something wrong with your country, then why bring more people to it?

Of course you could say if you are a decent guy you shouldn't find anything wrong with it, but it's not inconceivable to have a gradual progress into the kind of thing Matt is commenting.

That's right. A lot of things that start out looking good are just trojan horses that get worse. For example, women's equal rights become equal power and eventually gave superior power to women. Gay rights may someday follow the same path, first equal rights, then equal power and end up in superior power. The hippie movement in the 60's started out as being anti-war and anti-conformity. But then it became a movement to degenerate basic morals in the US and cultural decay. So even that was a trojan horse. Likewise, this new law could be a trojan horse too.

There already is a law that's preventing from those with seriously delinquent tax debts from going or moving abroad.