Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: i-node who wrote (978420)	11/3/2016 10:14:59 PM
From: bentway	Respond to of 1576613

Read the article, Dave. Comey did not 'reopen' the email investigation.

To: i-node who wrote (978420)	11/3/2016 10:26:04 PM
From: bentway	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1576613

Growing evidence of a hidden women’s vote for Clinton By Katie Paris \| November 3, 2016 Evidence of secret support for Hillary Clinton is mounting, and it is characterized by a key common trait: Enthusiasm. I was recently invited to join a secret Facebook group in support of Hillary Clinton. The group has over 250,000 members and the posts are exuberant. For all we have heard about a “ silent majority” of Donald Trump supporters — voters who supposedly want to see him in the White House but are too embarrassed to tell pollsters — a new study finds that there is no such thing. Regardless of whether they were asked by a live interviewer or in an online poll with no personal interaction, a statistically insignificant number of likely voters gave different answers about who they are voting for. But evidence of secret support for Clinton keeps piling up. It turns out that “there are hundreds of private Facebook groups with names like ‘Secret Hillary Club,'” according to Lyz Lenz, reporting for Marie Claire. Many women, despite the wishes of their husbands, the sentiment in their communities, and the ceaseless media barrage of insults against their candidate, are secretly supporting Clinton. As Lenz writes: While nodding along with their husbands’ politics and passing as Trump supporters in their neighborhoods, there’s a group of women making fervent plans for what happens when they’re finally alone in the voting booth. They are not only voting for Clinton. They are fervent about it. That echoes what evangelical leader Deborah Fikes told Politico about the reaction to her support for Clinton: Fikes said her public statement elicited a wave of private applause. “I’ve had many more evangelicals than you would realize email me and tell me and text me and say, ‘You are doing the right thing. I’m proud of you. I wish I could do it.” They are proud of her. They are cheering her on. They are for her. We’ve said it all year long: Clinton voters are enthusiastic. Even if they cannot say it out loud, they are eager to show it in the voting booth. shareblue.com

To: i-node who wrote (978420)	11/4/2016 10:43:55 AM
From: bentway	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1576613

Reince Priebus' False claim that 80% of Clinton Foundation costs are overhead By Aaron Sharockman on Thursday, August 25th, 2016 at 10:53 a.m. politifact.com excerpt/conclusion: The American Institute of Philanthropy’s Charity Watch, reached the same conclusion. It has given the Clinton Foundation an A rating and says it spends only 12 percent of the money it raises on "overhead." "The Clinton Foundation is an excellent charity," Charity Watch president Daniel Borochoff said Aug. 24, 2016, on CNN. "They are able to get 88 percent of their spending to bona fide program services and their fundraising efficiency is really low. It only costs them $2 to raise $100." Sandra Minuitti at the group Charity Navigator used the same general calculation when talking to our colleagues FactCheck.org, though she did not include the Clinton Foundation’s affiliates. By that measure, in 2013, 80.6 percent of spending was on program services. Our ruling Priebus said, "The fact is" the Clinton Foundation has "got about 80 percent in overhead and 20 percent of the money is actually getting into the places it should." Priebus is incorrectly reading IRS documents. Only a small amount of the donations collected by the Clinton Foundation are awarded as grants to other nonprofit groups. But that doesn’t mean that every other dollar is "overhead." The Clinton Foundation spends between 80-90 percent on program services, which experts say is the standard in the industry to define charitable works. It spends the majority of its money directly on projects rather than through third-party grants. Conversely, only between 10-20 percent is spent on management of the foundation and fundraising activities, which is tagged as "overhead." Priebus’ claim rates False.