| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| Will mushroom clouds turn Ohio voters away from Donald Trump? |
| 2016-10-26 |
| A new TV ad evoking one of the most famous political ads in U.S. history is painting Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump as too dangerous to be commander-in-chief. And it's not subtle about it. The spot from the Fifty Second Street Fund, a newly formed super PAC targeting Ohio voters, features footage of an atomic bomb detonating. Reminiscent of the once-broadcast "Daisy" ad. |
| Posted by:Blossom Unains5562 |
| #11 Who the fuck cares who exactly was behind them? Saddam's son as much as claimed responsibility a weeks later -- nuke the fucker and keep digging. Instead we got the FBI pulling idiot theories out of left field, never managing to find anything, but sure as hell making sure the people who could help them the most had no reason to talk to them. It's as if they were more interested in making sure the trail never led to a foreign source than in finding who really was responsible... |
| Posted by: Rob Crawford 2016-10-26 17:41 |
| #10 I expect a RINO was behind the Anthrax attacks and the Pinto. Tighten up folks. |
| Posted by: Shipman 2016-10-26 16:19 |
| #9 she makes hawks look like doves |
| Posted by: newc 2016-10-26 14:53 |
| #8 Yes, who was behind the anthrax attacks? |
| Posted by: jvalentour 2016-10-26 12:48 |
| #7 Yeah, and getting us into alliances with shaky partners like the Soddies will do it too. |
| Posted by: Abu Uluque 2016-10-26 12:38 |
| #6 Wilson, Roosevelt, Truman, Kennedy, Johnson....it's always the Democrats that get us into the most disastrous wars. There were Bush Sr and W, of course, but they seemed to have abandoned a lot of Republican principles hence the term RINO. Appease aggressive dictators, neglect the military, allow our enemies to believe we are weak all while operating with the belief that the United States must the world's policeman and there will be war. |
| Posted by: Abu Uluque 2016-10-26 12:35 |
| #5 Rob Crawford, who was behind the Anthrax attacks? |
| Posted by: rjschwarz 2016-10-26 10:39 |
| #4 Hillary is far more likely to get us into a war with Russia, that is something Trump should be hammering in to Ohio voters right now. |
| Posted by: rjschwarz 2016-10-26 10:38 |
| #3 Thought Bill Bradley(D) got out of politics back in the 1980s because this NJ pol got discouraged with the political process? So this former basketball player is a Hillary supporter? I recall another time (1964) when the specter of nuclear war was brought up during the Lyndon Johnson (D) campaign. Johnson's campaign showed a nuclear explosion mushroom cloud and linked Barry Goldwater's (R) name and campaign with the threat of nuclear war. Goldwater was painted as a loose cannon. Turns out that Johnson pushed the Vietnam War based on the false narrative of the Gulf of Tonkin attack by Vietnam. IMO that the most likely candidate to take us into a very serious war is Hillary Clinton, the "We came, We saw, He Died [referring to Libya's Qaddafi]" former SoS and POTUS candidate. |
| Posted by: JohnQC 2016-10-26 08:52 |
| #2 At this point, I'd consider a president willing to use our power in our defense to be a feature, not a bug. Bush should have used nukes after the anthrax attacks. Instead he let the FBI destroy the case, let the Clinton Crime Family bury the evidence, and abandoned one of our primary policies on WMD deterrence. |
| Posted by: Rob Crawford 2016-10-26 08:27 |
| #1 I doubt it will have it's intended effect. The urban centers will vote Shillery (some multiple times!) no matter what but any reference to weapons of any type energize the rest of us to vote anti-Shillery. |
| Posted by: GORT 2016-10-26 08:13 |