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!

Official Hillary Clinton 2016 thread (4 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.
TobiasFunke said:
See, this is part of the problem with the wikileaks stuff. There are a lot of people who apparently have no idea how journalism works.  Pretty much none of the media relations stuff described in the wikileaks emails are unusual practices, at least not as far as I've seen.  Journalists cover campaign events, and they always have. Journalists always contact the subject of a story they are about to publish to ask them for comment and to ensure that the person has been quoted properly. It would be irresponsible of them NOT to do that. Here is a twitter discussion started by an outstanding investigative journalist for the LA Times complaining about this very thing.




 
Click to expand...
Funny that no one from Fox news was invited to this based the RSVP log on Wikileaks.  Just the HRC shills were invited.  I will pass on hearing news from people letting HRCs campaign modify their stories.  Or from analysts feeding exactly worded questions to their candidate days before the question is asked at a live town hall.  Sorry, CNN/MSN/ABC your time has come and gone.  You are no longer to be believed. You are now a propaganda arm of the state.    

 
David Dodds said:
Funny that no one from Fox news was invited to this based the RSVP log on Wikileaks.  Just the HRC shills were invited.  I will pass on hearing news from people letting HRCs campaign modify their stories.  Or from analysts feeding exactly worded questions to their candidate days before the question is asked at a live town hall.  Sorry, CNN/MSN/ABC your time has come and gone.  You are no longer to be believed. You are now a propaganda arm of the state.    
Click to expand...
Can you provide the RSVP log you're talking about? The only one I was able to find on a google search was this one, which doesn't have any Fox News invites but also only has one each for CNN and MSNBC journalists and does have three invites extended to the right-leaning, Murdoch-owned WSJ, a fact I notice you omitted from your rant. It also says that its simply a list of the reporters following the Clinton campaign via a particular bus, so it's clearly possible (likely?) that Fox News, which doesn't do a lot of investigative or beat reporting, simply didn't have anyone on that bus.

Is that the list you think is suspect? I'm not sure because you also described it as a "big kickoff party," and this is a 25 person dinner party, and I assume a stickler for transparency and veracity such as yourself would never post misleading information.

 
Or from analysts feeding exactly worded questions to their candidate days before the question is asked at a live town hall.
Click to expand...
David, that didn't happen. You are either being deliberately dishonest or you are severely misinformed.

Donna Brazile's sample question was "Should Ohio and the 30 other states join the current list and abolish the death penalty?"

The actual question posed at the town hall was: "How can you still take your stance on the death penalty in light of what we know right now?”

edit: nevermind the fact that it's basically a boilerplate question that Clinton had already answered a million times.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
TobiasFunke said:
Can you provide the RSVP log you're talking about? The only one I was able to find on a google search was this one, which doesn't have any Fox News invites but also only has one each for CNN and MSNBC journalists and does have three invites extended to the right-leaning, Murdoch-owned WSJ, a fact I notice you omitted from your rant. It also says that its simply a list of the reporters following the Clinton campaign via a particular bus, so it's clearly possible (likely?) that Fox News, which doesn't do a lot of investigative or beat reporting, simply didn't have anyone on that bus.

Is that the list you think is suspect? I'm not sure because you also described it as a "big kickoff party," and this is a 25 person dinner party, and I assume a stickler for transparency and veracity such as yourself would never post misleading information.




 
Click to expand...
That's a different one than what I saw.  I did not book mark it and not super eager to go digging for it

 
timschochet said:
Saints it's not worth my time. If you have a news story that has never been reported on by the mainstream media that you think I should believe please present it. Not FBI notes. Not an opinion piece. A news story, like the Drudge one about Hillary's secret affairs. 
Click to expand...
To be fair to Tim, it makes sense that he would limit himself to what mainstream news reports. I mean, like he says, his time is limited.... after all, posting 18 hours a day here doesn't leave much left for independent thought and research. If we posted as much as he does, we'd settle for the canned/processed news too. 

 
I am curious from those that are a long-time Democrats. You guys love Hillary's positions on these things?

- Being cozy with Wall-Street and Soros

- Loves Fracking

- Has shown a propensity to want to meddle with all things Middle-east.

- Had her hands deep in the TARP crisis to bail out the big banks.

- Her public and private positions on matters 

- Open Trade (that nearly always translates to lost jobs in America)

I get why Tim likes her.  She represents a lot of conservative principals.  Not sure why Democrats are rolling over for her. If it's about lesser of the two-evils, I suppose I can buy that to a point, but how is it winning when your candidate supports a lot of nonsense like fracking and being in bed with Wall Street.  Are you going to criticize her then when she starts rolling out a bunch of stupid measures or gets us into wars for her and her friends gain?    

 
Joe Summer said:
David, that didn't happen. You are either being deliberately dishonest or you are severely misinformed.

Donna Brazile's sample question was "Should Ohio and the 30 other states join the current list and abolish the death penalty?"

The actual question posed at the town hall was: "How can you still take your stance on the death penalty in light of what we know right now?”

edit: nevermind the fact that it's basically a boilerplate question that Clinton had already answered a million times.
Click to expand...
Here's what the record shows: On March 12, Brazile, then vice chair of the DNC and a CNN and ABC contributor, allegedly wrote an email with the subject line "From time to time I get the questions in advance." It continues:

Here's one that worries me about HRC.

DEATH PENALTY

19 states and the District of Columbia have banned the death penalty. 31 states, including Ohio, still have the death penalty. According to the National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty, since 1973, 156 people have been on death row and later set free. Since 1976, 1,414 people have been executed in the U.S. That’s 11% of Americans who were sentenced to die, but later exonerated and freed. Should Ohio and the 30 other states join the current list and abolish the death penalty?

***

The next day, Roland Martin, a host on the TV One cable network who was co-hosting the town hall with CNN's Jake Tapper, sent an email to CNN producers with three questions, the third of which dealt with the death penalty. POLITICO obtained that email, and here's the text of the third question:

DEATH PENALTY

19 states and the District of Columbia have banned the death penalty. 31 states, including Ohio, still have the death penalty. According to the National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty, since 1973, 156 people have been on death row and later set free. Since 1976, 1,414 people have been executed in the U.S. That’s 11% of Americans who were sentenced to die, but later exonerated and freed. Should Ohio and the 30 other states join the current list and abolish the death penalty?

The wording, spacing, capitalization are identical.

 
This new deal where people with 10,000+ posts lob personal attacks at Tim for posting too much is a little weird.  Once your post count is in the five digits it's safe to say we're all just a bunch of nerds with cushy jobs/home lives that afford us the opportunity to waste time debating and cracking jokes on an internet message board, the only differences are of degree. And you can't even tell that without knowing aliases.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
David Dodds said:
I am curious from those that are a long-time Democrats. You guys love Hillary's positions on these things?

- Being cozy with Wall-Street and Soros

- Loves Fracking

- Has shown a propensity to want to meddle with all things Middle-east.

- Had her hands deep in the TARP crisis to bail out the big banks.

- Her public and private positions on matters 

- Open Trade (that nearly always translates to lost jobs in America)

I get why Tim likes her.  She represents a lot of conservative principals.  Not sure why Democrats are rolling over for her. If it's about lesser of the two-evils, I suppose I can buy that to a point, but how is it winning when your candidate supports a lot of nonsense like fracking and being in bed with Wall Street.  Are you going to criticize her then when she starts rolling out a bunch of stupid measures or gets us into wars for her and her friends gain?    
Click to expand...
It's a Charlie Sheen kind of winning. 

 
Slapdash said:
You've proven time and time again you lack the intelligence to know what my POV is, as evidenced by the myriad times you have misrepresented it. 

Keep trolling your sad life away
Click to expand...
All of your posts about me (and there's been a few dozen in the last 24 hours alone!) seem to ooze hostility. I think you need somebody to talk to about your anger issues. 

 
timschochet said:
All of your posts about me (and there's been a few dozen in the last 24 hours alone!) seem to ooze hostility. I think you need somebody to talk to about your anger issues. 
Click to expand...
Maybe you can recommend a good therapist if you find one to cure your addiction to this message board or narcissism

 
You know, I think more than a year ago, when we all knew or suspected that Hillary would be the front runner that this election would probably be full of scandal and alleged scandal. And that that was part of the problem with the Clintons. And that was sort of standard dysfunctionalism, the kind of thing that is part of the argument with the Clintons. They're dysfunctional, the government was dysfunctional, we all got triangulated and divided back in the 90s and hey we were heading back to that. And that was all when we were expecting Jeb or a Rubio or a RPaul or one of those 'normal' stand bearers to get in for the GOP.

But then the rise of Trump happened. Then we had this volatile mix of dysfunctionalism X dysfunctionalism X a big fat mudfest the likes of which we had never ever seen. And it got dumber and worse and dumb and worse to the 100th degree.

And now we have alleged sex assault victims trolling the Clintons on the one side and we have the Clintons trolling back with business experts in the audience. Calls for drug testing and... well it's getting worse. It's getting so bad not even I imagined it could get this bad, because.... {wait for it}...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
David Dodds said:
I am curious from those that are a long-time Democrats. You guys love Hillary's positions on these things?

- Being cozy with Wall-Street and Soros

- Loves Fracking

- Has shown a propensity to want to meddle with all things Middle-east.

- Had her hands deep in the TARP crisis to bail out the big banks.

- Her public and private positions on matters 

- Open Trade (that nearly always translates to lost jobs in America)

I get why Tim likes her.  She represents a lot of conservative principals.  Not sure why Democrats are rolling over for her. If it's about lesser of the two-evils, I suppose I can buy that to a point, but how is it winning when your candidate supports a lot of nonsense like fracking and being in bed with Wall Street.  Are you going to criticize her then when she starts rolling out a bunch of stupid measures or gets us into wars for her and her friends gain?    
Click to expand...
You sure ask a lot of questions for someone who seems unwilling to answer any of them.

Also you misrepresent a lot of Clinton's positions on the issues. For example I do like her position on fracking- IMO it would be silly to ban it outright because the cost/benefit is constantly shifting due to a variety of factors including coal, oil and natural gas prices and long-term outlook, viability of alternative fuel options (which varies based on geography), employment numbers, the status of fracking technology, etc. But I think it should be carefully regulated at the federal, state and municipal level, and that localities should have the most say. Clinton's reasoned, nuanced take on fracking- she certainly doesn't "love it", and she says many of the things I've said here- is one of the things I like about her.

Happy to do the rest if you give her actual positions on things, like maybe with links to her website or at least news items, instead of your interpretations of her positions on things.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
David Dodds said:
I am curious from those that are a long-time Democrats. You guys love Hillary's positions on these things?

- Being cozy with Wall-Street and Soros

I don't care about this. I voted for Bernie, but his whole "eat the rich" schtick kinda turned me off.

- Loves Fracking

Not a fan, but this isn't really a top issue for me.

- Has shown a propensity to want to meddle with all things Middle-east.

This is a huge problem. It was a dealbreaker for me in '08, and in the primaries this year. Unfortunately, either Clinton or Trump will become the next president, which means we're in for at least four more years of middle east adventures no matter what. If the GOP nominates an anti-war candidate in 2020, they'll have my vote then.

- Had her hands deep in the TARP crisis to bail out the big banks.

Not sure what you mean here, but I was in favor of the bank bailouts and still consider it one of the rare highlights of Bush's term, so I suspect I'll be fine with whatever this is.

- Her public and private positions on matters

Could not possibly care less. 

- Open Trade (that nearly always translates to lost jobs in America)

I support her on this also. The benefits of free trade outweight the costs.
Click to expand...
 
No handshakes, no drama between the Trump and Clinton camps at the Las Vegas debate


A moment with the potential to become a media spectacle might not happen at all. The Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton parties will not greet each other and exchange handshakes before the final debate in Las Vegas, as they have prior to the other two, according to a New York Times report.

...
Click to expand...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/10/19/no-handshakes-no-drama-between-the-trump-and-clinton-camps-at-the-las-vegas-debate/?postshare=7151476909196086&tid=ss_tw

 
Last edited by a moderator:
David Dodds said:
I am curious from those that are a long-time Democrats. You guys love Hillary's positions on these things?

- Being cozy with Wall-Street and Soros

- Loves Fracking

- Has shown a propensity to want to meddle with all things Middle-east.

- Had her hands deep in the TARP crisis to bail out the big banks.

- Her public and private positions on matters 

- Open Trade (that nearly always translates to lost jobs in America)

I get why Tim likes her.  She represents a lot of conservative principals.  Not sure why Democrats are rolling over for her. If it's about lesser of the two-evils, I suppose I can buy that to a point, but how is it winning when your candidate supports a lot of nonsense like fracking and being in bed with Wall Street.  Are you going to criticize her then when she starts rolling out a bunch of stupid measures or gets us into wars for her and her friends gain?    
Click to expand...
Nope....disagree with her on most of these and several other issues. Agree with her on a bunch of issues too though, and definitely consider her the lesser of two evils.

Our elections are binary...there are only two viable options and one protest option. I understand the protest option, but prefer to have my vote count, even if it's for a candidate I don't particularly like. Someone can agree that Hillary is crooked, and still believe she is by far the better choice. Someone can agree she's done some shady %#& and yet still recognize that that shady ^#&% is essentially the same shady ^#&*( that politicians have been doing pretty much from the beginning. I can support HIllary against Trump and not like her.

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
You know, I think more than a year ago, when we all knew or suspected that Hillary would be the front runner that this election would probably be full of scandal and alleged scandal. And that that was part of the problem with the Clintons. And that was sort of standard dysfunctionalism, the kind of thing that is part of the argument with the Clintons. They're dysfunctional, the government was dysfunctional, we all got triangulated and divided back in the 90s and hey we were heading back to that. And that was all when we were expecting Jeb or a Rubio or a RPaul or one of those 'normal' stand bearers to get in for the GOP.

But then the rise of Trump happened. Then we had this volatile mix of dysfunctionalism X dysfunctionalism X a big fat mudfest the likes of which we had never ever seen. And it got dumber and worse and dumb and worse to the 100th degree.

And now we have alleged sex assault victims trolling the Clintons on the one side and we have the Clintons trolling back with business experts in the audience. Calls for drug testing and... well it's getting worse. It's getting so bad not even I imagined it could get this bad, because.... {wait for it}...
Click to expand...
It is almost like the Clintons convinced an old friend to run for the GOP nomination so that they could actually have someone to beat.  Two least liked candidates in modern history...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006 said:
You know, I think more than a year ago, when we all knew or suspected that Hillary would be the front runner that this election would probably be full of scandal and alleged scandal. And that that was part of the problem with the Clintons. And that was sort of standard dysfunctionalism, the kind of thing that is part of the argument with the Clintons. They're dysfunctional, the government was dysfunctional, we all got triangulated and divided back in the 90s and hey we were heading back to that. And that was all when we were expecting Jeb or a Rubio or a RPaul or one of thsoe 'normal' stand bearers to get in for the GOP.

But then the rise of Trump happened. Then we had this volatile mix of dysfunctionalism X dysfunctionalism X a big fat mudfest the likes of which we had never ever seen. And it got dumber and worse and dumb and worse to the 100th degree.

And now we have alleged sex assault victims trolling the Clintons on the one side and we have the Clintons trolling back with business experts in the audience. Calls for drug testing and... well it's getting worse. It's getting so bad not even I imagined it could get this bad, because.... {wait for it}...
Click to expand...


SaintsInDome2006 said:
YOU SIR WIN THE GOLDEN PRIZE for predicting JUST HOW LOW CAN THE CLINTONS AND TRUMPS GO?!?!

:confetti:

:horns:
Click to expand...


Hopefully they start throwing chairs at each other and some huge bald dude half heartedly attempts to keep them apart.

 
Slapdash said:
It is almost like the Clinton's convinced an old friend to run for the GOP nomination so that they could actually have someone to beat.  Two least liked candidates in modern history...
Click to expand...
I always wondered why Bill met with Trump before he announced his candidacy. I know it may seem crazy but I think there is a chance they put Trump up to this. Doubtful but it makes you think.

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
No handshakes, no drama between the Trump and Clinton camps at the Las Vegas debate


A moment with the potential to become a media spectacle might not happen at all. The Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton parties will not greet each other and exchange handshakes before the final debate in Las Vegas, as they have prior to the other two, according to a New York Times report.

...
Click to expand...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/10/19/no-handshakes-no-drama-between-the-trump-and-clinton-camps-at-the-las-vegas-debate/?postshare=7151476909196086&tid=ss_tw
Click to expand...
They didn't shake hands prior to the second one either....very Presidential of them both by the way....seriously, these ######s are acting like four year olds with stupid #### like this and their inviting of the other's "kryptonite" to the debates...so ####### childish.  It's embarrassing.  The world is mocking us.

 
renesauz said:
Nope....disagree with her on most of these and several other issues. Agree with her on a bunch of issues too though, and definitely consider her the lesser of two evils.

Our elections are binary...there are only two viable options and one protest option. I understand the protest option, but prefer to have my vote count, even if it's for a candidate I don't particularly like. Someone can agree that Hillary is crooked, and still believe she is by far the better choice. Someone can agree she's done some shady %#& and yet still recognize that that shady ^#&% is essentially the same shady ^#&*( that politicians have been doing pretty much from the beginning. I can support HIllary against Trump and not like her.




 
Click to expand...
fully respect this. Thanks for answering

 
CBusAlex said:
David Dodds said:
I am curious from those that are a long-time Democrats. You guys love Hillary's positions on these things?

- Being cozy with Wall-Street and Soros

I don't care about this. I voted for Bernie, but his whole "eat the rich" schtick kinda turned me off.

- Loves Fracking

Not a fan, but this isn't really a top issue for me.

- Has shown a propensity to want to meddle with all things Middle-east.

This is a huge problem. It was a dealbreaker for me in '08, and in the primaries this year. Unfortunately, either Clinton or Trump will become the next president, which means we're in for at least four more years of middle east adventures no matter what. If the GOP nominates an anti-war candidate in 2020, they'll have my vote then.

- Had her hands deep in the TARP crisis to bail out the big banks.

Not sure what you mean here, but I was in favor of the bank bailouts and still consider it one of the rare highlights of Bush's term, so I suspect I'll be fine with whatever this is.

- Her public and private positions on matters

Could not possibly care less. 

- Open Trade (that nearly always translates to lost jobs in America)

I support her on this also. The benefits of free trade outweight the costs.



 
Click to expand...


 
Click to expand...
Fully respect this too. Thanks for answering.  

 
David Dodds said:
I am curious from those that are a long-time Democrats. You guys love Hillary's positions on these things?

- Being cozy with Wall-Street and Soros

- Loves Fracking

- Has shown a propensity to want to meddle with all things Middle-east.

- Had her hands deep in the TARP crisis to bail out the big banks.

- Her public and private positions on matters 

- Open Trade (that nearly always translates to lost jobs in America)

I get why Tim likes her.  She represents a lot of conservative principals.  Not sure why Democrats are rolling over for her. If it's about lesser of the two-evils, I suppose I can buy that to a point, but how is it winning when your candidate supports a lot of nonsense like fracking and being in bed with Wall Street.  Are you going to criticize her then when she starts rolling out a bunch of stupid measures or gets us into wars for her and her friends gain?    
Click to expand...
Not many replies I see. Maybe you'll get some later when they are done goose stepping.

 
- Has shown a propensity to want to meddle with all things Middle-east.

This is a huge problem. It was a dealbreaker for me in '08, and in the primaries this year. Unfortunately, either Clinton or Trump will become the next president, which means we're in for at least four more years of middle east adventures no matter what. If the GOP nominates an anti-war candidate in 2020, they'll have my vote then.
Click to expand...
Until the Middle East has functioning democracy and extremists are destroyed then no amount of burying our head in the sand is going to solve anything. 

How can you be anti-war when ISIS is cutting people's heads off and raping women?

 
I am curious from those that are a long-time Democrats. You guys love Hillary's positions on these things?

- Being cozy with Wall-Street and Soros: Banks are powerful whether they give money to someone or not.  Taking money from them doesn't necessarily mean the politician is bought.

- Loves Fracking:  Short-term stop gap to reduce our need for foreign oil

- Had her hands deep in the TARP crisis to bail out the big banks.: Great decision and the best thing W did as President

- Her public and private positions on matters:  You mean politics?

- Open Trade (that nearly always translates to lost jobs in America)  Some jobs lost, some jobs gained, overall good for the economy
Click to expand...

 
cstu said:
Until the Middle East has functioning democracy and extremists are destroyed then no amount of burying our head in the sand is going to solve anything. 

How can you be anti-war when ISIS is cutting people's heads off and raping women?
Click to expand...
How much of this was ISIS doing before we got there?

We'd all prefer the middle east to be peaceful and democratic. I just don't think going around creating power vacuums with no clear plan of how to fill them moves us in that direction.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

mr. furley
Long Island serial killer suspect in custody
Replies
34
Views
2K
Dezbelief
Dezbelief
krista4
In this thread I rank my favorite Beatles songs: 204-1.
138 139 140
Replies
7K
Views
262K
rockaction
rockaction
HellToupee
***Official*** Joe Biden 2016 Presidential Thread
Replies
35
Views
2K
That one guy
T

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top