What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

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

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...
:lmao:

I can't keep track of all the whining you do about racism, sexism, and so many other outrageous false claims.

 
Anyhow, Hillary joins the ranks of Daniel Webster, Henry Clay, Adlai Stevenson. All great statesmen who couldn't get elected President. Like them she would have been terrific, but sadly we'll never know. 

 
Arguing over Hillary Clinton again?  JHC.

She's a non-factor now, a joke, and will go down as one of the biggest failures in American history, since she couldn't beat the circus clown who currently lives in the White House.   You can dress it up all you want, about Comey, the emails or misogyny, but she lost a presidential election to Donald Trump, FFS.  How truly embarrassing. 

 
timschochet said:
Anyhow, Hillary joins the ranks of Daniel Webster, Henry Clay, Adlai Stevenson. All great statesmen who couldn't get elected President. Like them she would have been terrific, but sadly we'll never know. 
Click to expand...
In the same breath you make a definitive statement and then claim we will never know.   :lmao:

 
Ghost Rider said:
Arguing over Hillary Clinton again?  JHC.

She's a non-factor now, a joke, and will go down as one of the biggest failures in American history, since she couldn't beat the circus clown who currently lives in the White House.   You can dress it up all you want, about Comey, the emails or misogyny, but she lost a presidential election to Donald Trump, FFS.  How truly embarrassing. 
Click to expand...
Yep, she lost even after spying on her opponents.  Sad!

 
timschochet said:
Anyhow, Hillary joins the ranks of Daniel Webster, Henry Clay, Adlai Stevenson. All great statesmen who couldn't get elected President. Like them she would have been terrific, but sadly we'll never know. 
Click to expand...
We know she is not good enough to win the election.  Loser.

 
timschochet said:
Anyhow, Hillary joins the ranks of Daniel Webster, Henry Clay, Adlai Stevenson. All great statesmen who couldn't get elected President. Like them she would have been terrific, but sadly we'll never know. 
Click to expand...
I distinctly remember you doing this before. Why isn't James Cox a comp here? Harding is definitely a comp for Trump.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006 said:
I distinctly remember you doing this before. Why isn't James Cox a comp here? Harding is definitely a comp for Trump.
Click to expand...
Because nobody remembers anything about Cox except for his VP candidate? 

I mentioned the people I did because (1) they each ran for Prez more than once (2) they're remembered in American history as important political leaders. I suppose I could have added Bryan. 

Hillary belongs on this list. 

 
timschochet said:
Because nobody remembers anything about Cox except for his VP candidate? 

I mentioned the people I did because (1) they each ran for Prez more than once (2) they're remembered in American history as important political leaders. I suppose I could have added Bryan. 

Hillary belongs on this list. 
Click to expand...
Sorry that's ridiculous. I'm not in this thread but that's an absurd comp, not only directly but also in terms of the men they were running against. Hillary lost to Trump, not Eisenhower.

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
Sorry that's ridiculous. I'm not in this thread but that's an absurd comp, not only directly but also in terms of the men they were running against. Hillary lost to Trump, not Eisenhower.
Click to expand...
She also lost to Obama. And I don't remember who Henry Clay lost to. I don't think that's relevant. 

 
timschochet said:
She also lost to Obama. And I don't remember who Henry Clay lost to. I don't think that's relevant. 
Click to expand...
She lost the primary to Obama, not the presidency. That list of primary/nomination losers is filled with nobodies. I wouldn't go there.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
James Cox is not an insult either - he was a terrific politician and candidate. He just lost to one of the worst candidates and presidents ever. He also has the 'What if' issue because FDR wasn't the nominee.  The fact that most don't remember Cox 97 years later is not exactly a shame, he had a great career.

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
Phantom of the Convention? 
Click to expand...
This would be interesting as a future script, for the 2020 Democratic Convention. 

The Democrats nominate a new young candidate- let's say Corey Booker. But deep under the Convention hall, she lurks, waiting to reap her revenge on all who crossed her...

This could work. 

 
We could also do a remake of Sunset Boulevard: 

"I remember you Mrs Clinton. You used to be big." 

"I AM big. It's the elections that got small!" 

 
I have no problem with Hillary's loss, never cared for her (I was leaning Kasich during the primaries and would have voted for him if he won the nom).

What baffles me is the how effective the narrative of her being a liar was. No amount after fact checking could convince people that she, and Bernie, were by far the most honest candidates out there. They were and it wasn't even close.

Despite the fact that they spent millions of tax dollars on dozens and dozens of "investigations" into emails and Benghazi (BENGHAZI!!!BWAAAARGHHXPLODE!1!!!!12!2) that clearly and repeatedly demonstrated she didn't do anything illegal and was, at worst, guilty of making a bad decision about using the server in the first place they still accomplished their goal.

The Republicans real goal all along was to poison her as a candidate and it worked. Congratulations I guess but it makes me ashamed to have been a Republican for most of my life. This isn't my party anymore so I'm stuck being a marginalized independent.

Bravo Congress, bravo.

 
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...
And how many people would not vote for Sanders because he was a New England Jew?

 
Misogyny runs deeper than we think in America. So does misandry. They both run pretty damn deep from what I've seen, and each has its own expression, one in the booths, one in culture.   

But she was a terrible candidate for the times in which she was running. 

 
Oh good lord.... I'm glad I wasn't here Friday for this thread.

It doesn't matter if she gets why she lost. What matters is the dems that nominated her don't get it. 

 
Hov34 said:
Am I supposed to be outraged that convicted murderers got a chance to leave prison and work in the governor's mansion?  No seriously, I'm asking because I don't know what I should be outraged by anymore.
Click to expand...
The twitter user that posted this section from her book sure seemed troubled by it.  This is a 'black activist,' not some conservative echo chamber.  Here he is again in his own words:

Samuel Sinyangwe @samswey·22h

Replying to @samswey and @JeanetteJing

How could she say these things? How did so many people read this and say nothing? How did the media miss/ignore this the entire election?
Click to expand...
But no.  Hillary Clinton forming her opinion on black men from common house slavery from the only demographic in which slavery is still legal shouldn't trouble you at all.  Back to sleep. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ren Ho3k said:
The twitter user that posted this section from her book sure seemed troubled by it.  This is a 'black activist,' not some conservative echo chamber.  Here he is again in his own words:

But no.  Hillary Clinton forming her opinion on black men from common house slavery from the only demographic in which slavery is still legal shouldn't trouble you at all.  Back to sleep. 
Click to expand...


So I should be outraged?

 
Ren Ho3k said:
Does racism outrage you?  If it does, then yes.  If not, then no.  
Click to expand...
this. 

Paula Deen gets cast off to the Island of Misfit Bigots, while HRC is:  Senator, SoS, and campaigns for President - all unscathed by this ####.

seems legit. 

 
For what it's worth, I'm not outraged by it.  I just sort of read it like 'yeah that's pretty fked up.'  

 
Ren Ho3k said:
https://twitter.com/samswey/status/872151657626443776

Apparently Hillary learned a lot about black people from her time owning house slaves in the Arkansas governor's mansion.  
Click to expand...
This quote is awful and Clinton should be criticized for its tone-deafness and skewed perspective. But the people making it akin to the Clintons owning slaves are pretty dumb.  If you consider free labor from inmates to be akin to slavery, then we're all guilty of condoning slavery since our democratically elected government is responsible for setting up the inmate work system.  Every time an inmate cleans your litter that inmate is your slave, according to this logic.

And honestly it's fine to feel that way. But if so you should be fighting your government to end the practice of inmate "slavery," not pretending the "slaves" here were Clinton's.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
TobiasFunke said:
This quote is awful and Clinton should be criticized for its tone-deafness and skewed perspective. But the people making it akin to slavery are pretty dumb.  If you consider free labor from inmates to be akin to slavery, then we're all guilty of condoning slavery since our democratically elected government is responsible for setting up the inmate work system.  Every time an inmate cleans your litter that inmate is your slave, according to this logic.

And honestly it's fine to feel that way. But if so you should be fighting your government to end the practice of inmate "slavery," not pretending the "slaves" here were Clinton's.
Click to expand...
I'm kind of armchair opposing it, and not doing anything about it in the real world, like all our political posts here.  I don't litter that way and try to recycle here and there.  

But I have brought it up and still find it abhorrent:

https://forums.footballguys.com/forum/topic/755844-battle-of-new-orleans-will-there-be-bloodshed-today/?do=findComment&comment=20098203

https://forums.footballguys.com/forum/topic/755844-battle-of-new-orleans-will-there-be-bloodshed-today/?do=findComment&comment=20098223

 
The only way she would surprise me in talking about her loss would be that it was HER.

Other than that- she is going to deflect every which way until they put her 6 feet under.

 
Chadstroma said:
The only way she would surprise me in talking about her loss would be that it was HER.

Other than that- she is going to deflect every which way until they put her 6 feet under.
Click to expand...
:goodposting:  That is exactly right! According to Hilary she has done nothing wrong in her life. 

 
TobiasFunke said:
This quote is awful and Clinton should be criticized for its tone-deafness and skewed perspective. But the people making it akin to the Clintons owning slaves are pretty dumb.  If you consider free labor from inmates to be akin to slavery, then we're all guilty of condoning slavery since our democratically elected government is responsible for setting up the inmate work system.  Every time an inmate cleans your litter that inmate is your slave, according to this logic.

And honestly it's fine to feel that way. But if so you should be fighting your government to end the practice of inmate "slavery," not pretending the "slaves" here were Clinton's.
Click to expand...
Hillary has always been so out of touch.

 
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 thought you didn't like hypotheticals?

 
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
12K
NorvilleBarnes
NorvilleBarnes
tommyboy
Kathy Griffin& Hillary: stuck in a hole, still digging
Replies
4
Views
705
tommyboy
tommyboy
D
How to turn a silk purse into a sow's ear
Replies
0
Views
208
dutch
D

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top