What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Hillary Clinton blames Comey, WikiLeaks and 'misogyny' for 2016 loss (1 Viewer)

Higgs said:
Pretty sure there are people on welfare in the states that voted for Hillary.
Click to expand...
If the dems become more committed to those on welfare instead of mocking them as uneducated it would probably help them come election time...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Boston said:
If the dems become more committed to those on welfare instead of mocking them as uneducated it would probably help them come election time...
Click to expand...
Right....what about whole red states that are net takers from the federal government? How should they be treated? And is stating that certain people are less educated mocking them or noting a fact?

 
Rich Conway said:
I don't understand what you're changing and what you're keeping the same.

It's an inarguable fact that Clinton pushed the "vote for me because I'm a woman" angle.  I sincerely believe that she received a lot of votes purely because the voter wanted to vote for a woman.  I personally believe that those votes greatly outnumbered the "voted against her because she's a woman" votes.

Now, if you want to argue that a portion of the public's dislike of her is due to her being a woman, I don't know how to calculate that percentage.
Click to expand...
I'm saying at a woman who lived every aspect of Trumps life wouldn't get a vote in the primaries.  She'd basically be a more reviled version of Marge Schott.  And a man who lived every aspect of Hilary Clinton's life would be, at worst, basically the same candidate. 

If you admit that, which I think is basically impossible to deny, then you're admitting misogyny was at play here because the candidates were treated differently based on gender.  Trump's divorces and statements about parenting alone would probably doom him if he was a woman.  Let alone being a wealthy heiress who inherited the family business from her dad and then ran a bunch of casino companies into the ground. She's just be some dumb rich broad who self-markets well, a Kardashian minus the looks and the sex tape.  The false narrative about Trumps business acumen would never have sold.

 
TobiasFunke said:
I'm saying at a woman who lived every aspect of Trumps life wouldn't get a vote in the primaries.  She'd basically be a more reviled version of Marge Schott.  And a man who lived every aspect of Hilary Clinton's life would be, at worst, basically the same candidate. 

If you admit that, which I think is basically impossible to deny, then you're admitting misogyny was at play here because the candidates were treated differently based on gender.  Trump's divorces and statements about parenting alone would probably doom him if he was a woman.  Let alone being a wealthy heiress who inherited the family business from her dad and then ran a bunch of casino companies into the ground. She's just be some dumb rich broad who self-markets well, a Kardashian minus the looks and the sex tape.  The false narrative about Trumps business acumen would never have sold.
Click to expand...
I disagree with all of that.

Not to mention, I suspect Kim Kardashian would have destroyed Trump in any election.

Let's ask you some questions, then:
- Did Hillary push the "vote for me because I'm a woman" angle?
- Did people vote for Hillary specifically because she was a woman?
- Do you believe those votes outnumbered any votes for Trump (against Hillary) because she was a woman?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Rich Conway said:
I disagree with all of that.

Not to mention, I suspect Kim Kardashian would have destroyed Trump in any election.

Let's ask you some questions, then:
- Did Hillary push the "vote for me because I'm a woman" angle?
- Did people vote for Hillary specifically because she was a woman?
- Do you believe those votes outnumbered any votes for Trump (against Hillary) because she was a woman?
Click to expand...
All due respect GB.  But you think a thrice-divorced heiress who cheated on her husbands, repeatedly referenced being sexually attracted to one son, basically abandoned another, boasted about never changing a diaper, and remarked upon seeing a group of ten year old boys that she was gonna be dating some of them soon could win a single primary delegate, let alone the presidency???

If you really think that there's no real reason for us to consider a discussion on the role gender plays in politics.

ETA: also the woman is question is 70, overweight and unattractive.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Todd Andrews said:
So? The vast majority of counties/states that voted for Trump are net takers from the federal government. And they generally have higher individual/family welfare rates than the rest of the country.  This is really not very complicated.  Facts are fun!
Click to expand...
That's a ratio of government expenditures in those states versus government receives generated from those states.  I'd be more interested to see total welfare dollars in each state.

 
MarvinTScamper said:
thanks Tips.   

I realize there are more factors.   These aren't them.   

The biggest reason she lost is that the entire opposition, and some of her own, recognize she's a narcissistic liar.   You can blame the news, or you can blame her actions that the news reported.   Most non-lapdogs can tell the difference.
Click to expand...


People realized she is a narcissistic liar...and then voted for Trump?

That does not logically compute.

 
TobiasFunke said:
All due respect GB.  But you think a thrice-divorced heiress who cheated on her husbands, repeatedly referenced being sexually attracted to one son, basically abandoned another, boasted about never changing a diaper, and remarked upon seeing a group of ten year old boys that she was gonna be dating some of them soon could win a single primary delegate, let alone the presidency???

If you really think that there's no real reason for us to consider a discussion on the role gender plays in politics.

ETA: also the woman is question is 70, overweight and unattractive.
Click to expand...
The truth is I have no idea how the public would react to your scenario.  Playing your game, she would also have been a popular reality TV star for years, and Trump would have been married to a former POTUS, so who knows.

I notice you didn't answer the questions posed to you.

 
Higgs said:
That's a ratio of government expenditures in those states versus government receives generated from those states.  I'd be more interested to see total welfare dollars in each state.
Click to expand...
Right, because taxpayers from New Jersey funding roads and colleges and Medicaid in Mississippi isnt welfare. 

 
Boston said:
If the dems become more committed to those on welfare instead of mocking them as uneducated it would probably help them come election time...
Click to expand...
white and on welfare = uneducated = stupid = Deplorable and irredeemable = racist, sexist, xenophobic, anti-Semitic = losing Ohio, PA, Wisconsin = losing the election.

 
Rich Conway said:
The truth is I have no idea how the public would react to your scenario.  Playing your game, she would also have been a popular reality TV star for years, and Trump would have been married to a former POTUS, so who knows.

I notice you didn't answer the questions posed to you.
Click to expand...
I didn't answer your question because as I said if you disagreed with the premise that a female Trump would be hated beyond belief and would never win a primary I don't know that we'd find common ground on this stuff.  

But briefly- I think many people probably voted Clinton because of her gender in the primaries, although I don't know it was enough to create the entire margin over Sanders.  

I seriously doubt it got her a lot of votes in the general, because anyone who cares enough about gender issues to support a female candidate on that basis would already have been passionately dedicated to defeating a lifelong misogynist and serial sexual assaulter like Trump regardless of the gender of his opponent.

 
TobiasFunke said:
I didn't answer your question because as I said if you disagreed with the premise that a female Trump would be hated beyond belief and would never win a primary I don't know that we'd find common ground on this stuff.  
Click to expand...
One thing to consider - men's private lives are much more free game than women's.  I'm pretty confident there are some salacious stories about Hillary and some of her female companions that the media elected not to pursue.

 
The Commish said:
you really DO have a reading comprehension problem don't you?  I'm sorry I made fun of you before.  I thought it was shtick.  Sincerest apologies.  
Click to expand...
I read just fine.  He said he was only speaking in facts.  I highlighted his previous post - "The parts of the country on welfare elected an unqualified President" and pointed out this statement wasn't factual.  A factual statement would have looked like this - "The top 10 states that had the highest ratio of federal welfare support versus federal income derived voted for Trump".  He made a sweeping generalization that was factually incorrect.  There were in fact "parts of the country on welfare" that Hillary won.

I wouldn't expect someone of your limited intelligence to understand such a nuance.

 
sho nuff said:
People realized she is a narcissistic liar...and then voted for Trump?

That does not logically compute.
Click to expand...
it does.  They took the devil they didn't know over the devil they did know.  And they chose a narcissistic liar who wanted to rip Washington apart over one who whored herself out to it.

Big difference to me, and I hate Trump.

 
Higgs said:
The Commish said:
you really DO have a reading comprehension problem don't you?  I'm sorry I made fun of you before.  I thought it was shtick.  Sincerest apologies.  
Click to expand...
I read just fine.  He said he was only speaking in facts.  I highlighted his previous post - "The parts of the country on welfare elected an unqualified President" and pointed out this statement wasn't factual.  A factual statement would have looked like this - "The top 10 states that had the highest ratio of federal welfare support versus federal income derived voted for Trump".  He made a sweeping generalization that was factually incorrect.  There were in fact "parts of the country on welfare" that Hillary won.

I wouldn't expect someone of your limited intelligence to understand such a nuance.
Click to expand...
Like I said, I apologize. :hifive:  

 
Higgs said:
I read just fine.  He said he was only speaking in facts.  I highlighted his previous post - "The parts of the country on welfare elected an unqualified President" and pointed out this statement wasn't factual.  A factual statement would have looked like this - "The top 10 states that had the highest ratio of federal welfare support versus federal income derived voted for Trump".  He made a sweeping generalization that was factually incorrect.  There were in fact "parts of the country on welfare" that Hillary won.

I wouldn't expect someone of your limited intelligence to understand such a nuance.
Click to expand...
And yet...I was factually correct. You lose. 

 
Todd Andrews said:
Got news for you - there are more people in blue states than in red states. 
Click to expand...
So that means the blue states win the welfare popular vote but the GOP won the welfare electoral college...I think this is staring to make sense...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
MarvinTScamper said:
it does.  They took the devil they didn't know over the devil they did know.  And they chose a narcissistic liar who wanted to rip Washington apart over one who whored herself out to it.

Big difference to me, and I hate Trump.
Click to expand...
The difference is the current narcissistic liar that won...was clueless about the job and has shown as much.

 
This is precisely what this level of stupid must lead to. An unfertilized egg passed during menstruation must carry the same legal penalty that male masturbation carries. Therefore requiring that every egg be fertilized every month, leaving abortion the only legal means of birth control.

 
sho nuff said:
The difference is the current narcissistic liar that won...was clueless about the job and has shown as much.
Click to expand...
I can't argue a lot.  She ####ed the pooch every chance she got.  I'd take Loser McLoserton over her every day. 

 
TobiasFunke said:
I didn't answer your question because as I said if you disagreed with the premise that a female Trump would be hated beyond belief and would never win a primary I don't know that we'd find common ground on this stuff.  

But briefly- I think many people probably voted Clinton because of her gender in the primaries, although I don't know it was enough to create the entire margin over Sanders.  

I seriously doubt it got her a lot of votes in the general, because anyone who cares enough about gender issues to support a female candidate on that basis would already have been passionately dedicated to defeating a lifelong misogynist and serial sexual assaulter like Trump regardless of the gender of his opponent.
Click to expand...
See, I think you're overestimating the intelligence of the general public.  I think a significant percentage never considered "women's issues" or any of the news regarding Trump.  I suspect that a significant percentage had no information other than "first female POTUS" and "that Apprentice guy", or maybe "wealthy businessman".  For example, I know someone in my office, who is clearly a smart person, but just chooses not to educate himself on this stuff. We talked about this once, and the sum total of his knowledge and opinion about either candidate was "we need a successful businessman".

 
Has anyone said pantsuits? I think it was the pantsuits. And she's a corrupt liar with epilepsy. I voted for her though. :shrug:  

 
Rich Conway said:
See, I think you're overestimating the intelligence of the general public.  I think a significant percentage never considered "women's issues" or any of the news regarding Trump.  I suspect that a significant percentage had no information other than "first female POTUS" and "that Apprentice guy", or maybe "wealthy businessman".  For example, I know someone in my office, who is clearly a smart person, but just chooses not to educate himself on this stuff. We talked about this once, and the sum total of his knowledge and opinion about either candidate was "we need a successful businessman".
Click to expand...
Also, her husband has as big a closet full of nonsense with regard to women issues so she really lost any high-ground due to that...I will also say that I think a lot of those middle-of-the-road women who are not 24/7 into politics have gotten very turned off by these feminists who claim to talk for the whole gender when no one has given them that blank check...they don't represent the world they live in...

 
TobiasFunke said:
:rolleyes:

Here's how simple this is: if you flip Trump and Clinton's entire lives- their experience, their families (including Trumps divorces and statements about parenthood), their treatment of the opposite sex more broadly, their government and private sector experience, all of it- who wins the election?

If you admit Clinton wins in a massive landslide, you're admitting there's misogyny at work in the results.  If you think the results would have been the same ... all due respect but you're out of your ####### mind.
Click to expand...
So in this little scenario of yours would Donald Trump be Bill's first lady in the white House?

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

NorvilleBarnes
Hillary takes responsibility for loss. Blames Russia, FBI, misogyny, media, and unprecedented interference.
7 8 9
Replies
438
Views
7K
NorvilleBarnes
NorvilleBarnes
tommyboy
Kathy Griffin& Hillary: stuck in a hole, still digging
Replies
4
Views
641
tommyboy
tommyboy
D
How to turn a silk purse into a sow's ear
Replies
0
Views
118
dutch
D

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top