>>37552

I wonder what these two are up to.

The Washington Post has repeatedly pointed out part of the reason the dem black vote is going to Hillary is because they want someone to follow through with what he has done.

Also, with this bullshit Clinton opens himself (and his wife) up to shit that they did in the 90s and how those decisions created the present. I mean seriously, does he think Trump is not going to rake Hillary over the coals for NAFTA?

What the fuck is his end game here? Who is he trying to appeal to?

Economy in much better shape than when Obama came in. Number of unemployed dramatically down. War in the Middle East... really, wasn't Hilary Secretary of State and responsible for much of our foreign policy agenda? Does he really want to paint the situation as being look what Obama and Hillary did was terrible? I mean its not like Hillary was some average congress person throughout Obama's terms, she had a very powerful position and a key position when it comes to foreign affairs.

>>37552
>wnd
……………………………………..________
………………………………,.-‘”……………….“~.,
………………………..,.-”……………………………..“-.,
…………………….,/………………………………………..”:,
…………………,?………………………………………………\,
………………./…………………………………………………..,}
……………../………………………………………………,:`^`..}
……………/……………………………………………,:”………/
…………..?…..__…………………………………..:`………../
…………./__.(…..“~-,_…………………………,:`………./
………../(_….”~,_……..“~,_………………..,:`…….._/
……….{.._$;_……”=,_…….“-,_…….,.-~-,},.~”;/….}
………..((…..*~_…….”=-._……“;,,./`…./”…………../
…,,,___.\`~,……“~.,………………..`…..}…………../
…………(….`=-,,…….`……………………(……;_,,-”
…………/.`~,……`-………………………….\……/\
………….\`~.*-,……………………………….|,./…..\,__
,,_……….}.>-._\……………………………..|…………..`=~-,
…..`=~-,_\_……`\,……………………………\
……………….`=~-,,.\,………………………….\
…………………………..`:,,………………………`\…………..__
……………………………….`=-,……………….,%`>–==“
…………………………………._\……….._,-%…….`\
……………………………..,<`.._|_,-&“…………….`\

>>37553
>don't blame the black man! it was hillary all along
She was a member of the cabinet--the president's cabinet. i.e. the people subordinate to, and directly working with, the president.

Regardless of whether he agreed with her actions, he is responsible as an administrator for the administration. That's part of being in a position of power; you are culpable for the people who work for you, especially *directly* for you.

If he was unaware of what she was doing, he is incompetent. If he was aware, he is complicit. Either way it is, as an administrator, his responsibility.
He is at least as guilty as she is.

WND? Come on, man.

>>37599
http://reason.com/blog/2016/04/07/watch-bill-clinton-accuse-black-lives-ma
http://www.politico.com/blogs/2016-dem-primary-live-updates-and-results/2016/04/bill-clinton-philadelphia-protesters-221691
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/bill-clinton-tangles-black-lives-matter-activists-philadelphia
http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/07/politics/bill-clinton-black-lives-matter-protesters/

>"I don't know how you would characterize the gang leaders who got 13-year-old kids hopped up on crack and sent them on down the street to murder other African American children," said Clinton. "Maybe you thought they were good citizens, she didn't. [Hillary] didn't. You are defending the people who kill the lives you say matter. Tell the truth."

Bill's comments re obama's failure were a couple weeks ago, and did not get much media coverage. video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o9bsP2As3uc

>>37607
>>"I don't know how you would characterize the gang leaders who got 13-year-old kids hopped up on crack and sent them on down the street to murder other African American children," said Clinton. "Maybe you thought they were good citizens, she didn't. [Hillary] didn't. You are defending the people who kill the lives you say matter. Tell the truth."
As much as I dislike Hillary, and there's plenty of things to blame Bill for as well, he was right to defend his wife on this.
BLM's hypocrisy is astounding, and no one wants to call them on it for fear of being labelled racists.
I guess the Clintons, as Dems, feel that they have a bit more leeway on that since Dems tend to (at least nominally) support black issues.

>>37649
The Clintons are fucking snakes, but what's politically convenient for them just so happens to be congruent with the truth this time.
He's right.

>>37597
Yeah but Obama's not the one who has to worry about winning a primary and a general election. Hillary is.

>>37669
You're right, he isn't. However, I'm not sure how much shillary has to "worry". She seems to be what the establishment wants.

I'm voting Trump, regardless.

>>37553
>unemployment is down

Why are liberals so fucking stupid? Unemployment is down because he changed the definition of what unemployment was. It's not actually down. The number changed because the standard changed.

I hope one day the country gets split into liberal and conservative and we can finally see which one was right. I'm willing to bet conservative would be a bustling country while liberal would be a communist one.

>>37679
Yeah labor participation rate hasn't been this low since the 1970s.
It's been steadily declining since 2008.

Please stop calling them liberals, anon. Leftists, progressives, even fabians are all better.

>>37684
It's been declining since the 60s you dingus

>>37686
Why would you just lie like that?
It was at a high in the 1990s.

>>37684
Why would I not call them liberals?

Why is leftist, progressive, or fabian better?

Honest question.

>>37689
Because automation has made the labor participation rate decline since the 60s and I'm not lying. Futhermore, I think whatever source told you it set a high in the 90s should be burned at the stake for misleading people.

http://www.factcheck.org/2015/03/declining-labor-participation-rates/

>>37692
I'm not him but there are different kinds of liberalism. Classical liberalism is "a political ideology and a branch of liberalism which advocates civil liberties and political freedom with representative democracy under the rule of law and emphasizes economic freedom." Basically what you would call libertarianism today. I'm not sure what you would call "liberals" today. "New liberalism?"

>>37735
"Regressive left"

>>37689
The economy was at a high in the '90s, jobs have been declining everywhere with anti-sweat shop laws.

>>37679
Are you implying the conservatives don't also lie about stats when they're in power?

>>37679
>Unemployment is down because he changed the definition of what unemployment was.

If by "he" you mean George W. Bush then sure.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/20/business/in-the-new-economics-fast-food-factories.html

>>37693
My data was from
http://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet
I don't know why but the database is no longer available.

What factcheck neglected to mention was that it rose and was at a high in the 90s and has been falling since 2007-2008 because their only interest was in going after what the faggot lindsey graham said. It hasn't been declining since the 60s.

Anyway, this site will show the same plot using bureau of labor statistics data
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/labor-force-participation-rate
screenshot of plot https://i.imgur.com/Mzj6ppH.png

So the question is, do you burn factcheck.org at the stake for being misleading?

>>37794
No I still burn you at the stake for misleading because you're misrepresenting what is common knowledge. Automation and baby boomers leaving skilled jobs since the 50s and 60s is what has led to the continuous 50 year decline in labor particpation rates and to suggest that the 90s internet bubble reversed that trend, if even for a short 5 or 10 years, is factually incorrect at best.

In reality only a very small statistically insignificant portion of the manufacturing workforce transitioned from that to internet/programming/computer work. All those workers would have either all left for silicon valley or started tech companies in former steel, coal, and car manufacturing towns; The places where all the permanently un/underemployed manufacturing workers are in the rust belt wouldn't be the shitholes they are today if what you are saying was true.

>>37795
kek I didn't say any of your straw man bullshit. I said you lied about the data, and you did, and you still are. I said nothing about interpreting that data. The definition of labor participation rate isn't something people debate; it's simply and clearly defined.

Have fun with your hateful little vagina monologue, though.

>>37795
>Automation and baby boomers leaving skilled jobs since the 50s and 60s is what has led to the continuous 50 year decline in labor particpation
1 Welfare
2 Manufacturers and companies leaving for China,Ireland,Israel and cheap asian shitholes
3 Around 20 million illegals taking jobs,dragging wages down,increasing costs of education,healthcare,police,administration,etc,paying nothing,sending money home
4 Shit tier politicians who have no vision or idea what they're doing,no growth and development (muh roads)
5 Too many regulations,no growth and development (muh free market)
6 lobbyists making the rules,corporations ruling from behind (we get polluted by them while we're not allowed to compete against)

Present
(A) Why work when welfare gives you more than most jobs

and

(B) Most or none of the jobs demand your specific skills and education,so you can't get experience,have to settle with something irrelevant and worthless

Average 30 year old
- can't start a family,too poor
- can't start a business,too poor
- can't save money,too poor

Wageslave or welfare?

>>37796
>he thinks it's straw man bullshit
Jesus Christ kid, Take a basic economic class, please. That isn't what a strawman argument is either. And what do vaginas have to do with it? /pol/ has obviously warped your brain, son.

>>37813
Where do you even get that shit, not that even one seventh of it is true?

>>37555
>>wnd
……………………………………..________
………………………………,.-‘”……………….“~.,
………………………..,.-”……………………………..“-.,
…………………….,/………………………………………..”:,
…………………,?………………………………………………\,
………………./…………………………………………………..,}
……………../………………………………………………,:`^`..}
……………/……………………………………………,:”………/
…………..?…..__…………………………………..:`………../
…………./__.(…..“~-,_…………………………,:`………./
………../(_….”~,_……..“~,_………………..,:`…….._/
……….{.._$;_……”=,_…….“-,_…….,.-~-,},.~”;/….}
………..((…..*~_…….”=-._……“;,,./`…./”…………../
…,,,___.\`~,……“~.,………………..`…..}…………../
…………(….`=-,,…….`……………………(……;_,,-”
…………/.`~,……`-………………………….\……/\
………….\`~.*-,……………………………….|,./…..\,__
,,_……….}.>-._\……………………………..|…………..`=~-,
…..`=~-,_\_……`\,……………………………\
……………….`=~-,,.\,………………………….\
…………………………..`:,,………………………`\…………..__
……………………………….`=-,……………….,%`>–==“
…………………………………._\……….._,-%…….`\
……………………………..,<`.._|_,-&“…………….`\

>>37821
It's all true, you fucking retard.

>>37830
Who do you think you are kidding? Not even part of it is true. It's like you get all your info from WND and The Heritage Foundation.

1. Welfare is mostly white Americans from the south
2. Mexico is much more popular than any of the "Asian shitholes" you mentioned and it's hilarious that you think this is some politician's fault and not the CEO's
3. Those "20 million illegals" are really 12 million at most, and over 1/3rd of them are children under 10.
4. You shouldn't have elected do-nothing tea party congressmen then
5. Not enough regulations and the deregulatory spree of the Bush administration is what got us in this mess in the first place
6. "muh free market" indeed. Blame the companies that buy out Congress.

As for your BS about the "Average 30 year old",
Let's look at those misleading BLS statistics you like to quote, shall we?

http://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cpseea10.htm
See the 25-34 category? Yeah, 30 year olds aren't having as tough a time as you seem to have been misled into thinking, as long as they are educated that is.

tl;dr What you're saying isn't true and you're a complete imbecile if you believed it was for even a second.

>>37794
http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000
>Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey

>>37679
hi, this country is already split into liberal and conservative i.e. blue state vs red. what you want are state by state demographics telling you where your chosen industry is, what average pay is, that sort of stuff so that you can decide where to live. it depends on what you value which one is right for you.

>>37813
not the previous posters, but yeah kid, calm down.
we are all in this sink hole together.
and now to address some issues
1 what about welfare? do you know there is a time limit on it? if you mean disability, then feel free to complain about your fellow disabled countrymen.

2 yes, thats how free markets work. i personally side with regulated markets with transparency and no privatization of public goods (i.e. natural gas should belong to the state and citizens should receive compensation to cover both risk and the reward).
3 don't worry about the undocumented worker moping up piss on the night shift. DO worry about major companies exploiting the H-1B visa loophole to drive down labor costs in industries that used to offer 6 figure incomes and now have a starting wage of $12 / hr. its wrong to tell kids there is a future in STEM and then have them graduate with the equivalent of a mortgage and no job.

4 ok kid, you got me. we no longer have the political will, but term limits and overall max time in govt might help.

5 regulations do not stop growth or development. nothing is preventing you from starting a business where you get all anons together every friday for a huge party.

6 good point.

welfare only lasts for a set amount of time, 5 years i think.

we do ask a loaded question when you are in school. sorry about that. capitalism and free markets don't care about flags, just profit.

I remember when I saw this and the first thing that went through my mind was: 'damn, Bill is fucking based.'

He's entirely right about BLM being a bullshit movement.

~90% of black deaths are at the hands of black people; similar numbers for white people.

White people make up over half of people shot dead by police, and ~99% those instances where police have perhaps used disproportionate force have been ruled 'justified'.

>>37692
Because your a /pol/child who doesnt know what liberal means
Get the fuck off my board

>>37944
>x means y because I say so

>>37847
oooh, statistics.

Cite sources, shitlord.

>>37679
I hope we get separated too. That way we can do our thing and yall can shoot yourselves

>>37679
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-Yy4SfJksU&nohtml5=False

>>38247
Bite me, retard.

>>38382

why cite something when you can resort to simple insults?right anon?

whether you are wrong or right you look like a piece of shit cause you cant point to any credible evidence.

>>38388
Consider this a warning.

According to the FBI 83% of white people are killed by white people and 90% of black people are killed by black people.

https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-2013/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/expanded-homicide/expanded_homicide_data_table_6_murder_race_and_sex_of_vicitm_by_race_and_sex_of_offender_2013.xls

>>38397

are you anonymously threatening another anon on an anonymous board?

>cringelord.jpg

>>37735
Thats the económica sytem, not the political idology you trump's cocksucker