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 (2 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.
timschochet said:
What argument? I acknowledged her weaknesses months ago, in this thread. I wrote more than once that I didn't like her shadiness or her hubris, but I supported her over Bernie because as a centrist I preferred her positions.
Click to expand...
During the primaries both you and squiston argued at great length that Hillary should be the nominee because of her electability.  When people disagreed with you guys, you were incredibly condescending, suggesting that anyone that thought Bernie was more electable was ridiculous.  You need to acknowledge how wrong you were.  You can't just start pointing out now that Hillary was a horrible candidate as if those discussions never happened.

It's fine to be wrong about stuff, and we really don't know for sure that you actually were wrong.  Maybe Bernie also would have blown it.  The infuriating part is that your posts don't seem to acknowledge that the argument you're making was one that was literally made to you in hundreds of posts that you dismissed as ill informed or biased or unrealistic.

 
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
During the primaries both you and squiston argued at great length that Hillary should be the nominee because of her electability.  When people disagreed with you guys, you were incredibly condescending, suggesting that anyone that thought Bernie was more electable was ridiculous.  You need to acknowledge how wrong you were.  You can't just start pointing out now that Hillary was a horrible candidate as if those discussions never happened.
Click to expand...
Exactly. If you dared suggest to Tim, Squis, Gunz and whoever else that their heads were in the sand in regard to obvious warts of their candidate you were responded to in the most condescending of ways. Shameful behavior. It's people like them we can thank for the coming disaster.

 
Never understood the part that Bernie was unelectable.  He was no more of a socialists than the typical Democrats.  He was much better spoken, much more honest, and by far more likable, and did not have thousands of skeletons in his closet.  He was a better candidate on every level unless for some reason you thought being a women was important.  IMHO, no one cared that Hillary was a woman.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
During the primaries both you and squiston argued at great length that Hillary should be the nominee because of her electability.  When people disagreed with you guys, you were incredibly condescending, suggesting that anyone that thought Bernie was more electable was ridiculous.  You need to acknowledge how wrong you were.  You can't just start pointing out now that Hillary was a horrible candidate as if those discussions never happened.

It's fine to be wrong about stuff, and we really don't know for sure that you actually were wrong.  Maybe Bernie also would have blown it.  The infuriating part is that your posts don't seem to acknowledge that the argument you're making was one that was literally made to you in hundreds of posts that you dismissed as ill informed or biased or unrealistic.
Click to expand...
This is false. 

When Bernie started out, I did make a few tentative electability arguments but dropped them pretty quickly. squistion and a few others made those arguments consistently; I did not. My own argument was that against Trump either Bernie or Hillary would win and I didn't have any idea who had a better chance; both had weaknesses that I thought could be overcome but I preferred Hillary because of her positions on issues. I certainly never condescended or ridiculed anyone who thought Bernie was more electable. Again, others did. 

When it became clear that Hillary was going to be the nominee I became somewhat exasperated at those who stuck with Bernie to the bitter end because I thought they were hurting Hillary by not unifying behind her to stop the bigger threat. I can assure you that if it had been Bernie with the commanding lead and Hillary's fans refusing to accept the inevitable I would have been just as exasperated by them. 

 
jon_mx said:
Never understood the part that Bernie was electable.  He was no more of a socialists than the typical Democrats.  He was much better spoken, much more honest, and by far more likable, and did not have thousands of skeletons in his closet.  He was a better candidate on every level unless for some reason you thought being a women was important.  IMHO, no one cared that Hillary was a woman.  
Click to expand...
You could tell he had a passion for what he was saying.  That's what made him such a dangerous candidate.  

If it weren't for HRC and the DNC engineering the primary process we could easily have had a socialist in the WH come Jan. 21st.

 
timschochet said:
 I defended her against most of the specific attacks on the emails and the Foundation because I thought most of the charges were hogwash. None of that has changed. 
Click to expand...
Most people disagree with you, including a lot of Democrats.   The Clintons were greedy and operated in ways most people thought was unethical.  You put your head in the sand and instead of looking at facts, just dismissed these as 'boring'.  

 
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
Tim, I'm not going to go through these thousand page threads to find your posts but your recollection differs from mine.
Click to expand...
I'm not going to go through them either. I offer you my word that I gave up on the electability issue fairly early. 

As I wrote, once it became clear that Bernie couldn't beat Hillary I was pretty rude to Bernie fans in retrospect. I behaved rather insufferably, and I apologize for that. 

If I had to do it over I might very well have supported Bernie; maybe he really would have defeated Trump, who knows? But I reject the notion that the DNC rigged the primaries for Hillary. That is historical revisionism of the worst kind, and I see it growing with each day until it will become an accepted fact by many. The DNC clearly helped Hillary more than they should have, but it was black voters in the south that made it impossible for Bernie to win. 

 
jon_mx said:
Most people disagree with you, including a lot of Democrats.   The Clintons were greedy and operated in ways most people thought was unethical.  You put your head in the sand and instead of looking at facts, just dismissed these as 'boring'.  
Click to expand...
I agree with the fact that most people disagree with me. 

 
For what it's worth Tim, I agree with you that Hillary beating Bernie was not due to behind-the-scenes DNC shenanigans.

 I do think the perception that she was the more electable of the two candidates hurt him a lot.  I'm not sure how we could have convinced people otherwise.

 
Can someone break down this pizzagate madness?  I read a website for 5 minutes and felt like #### so I stopped. Tell me its 4chan conspiracy bullcrap.

 
Walking Boot said:
Epic Lena Dunham :cry:
Click to expand...
I guess it's amusing to laugh at people who are distraught by this result. Lena Dunham spent the last 18 months working hard to try to get Hillary Clinton elected because she believed in Hillary's cause; she thought Hillary would be what was best in for the country. Lena Dunham didn't earn any money working for Hillary. Nor did any of the other thousands of volunteers. You can disagree with them all you like, but I think it's pretty shameful to mock them. 

 
Dang, you guys are being harder on Tim than you were on me for Palin.  Sheesh.

It's hard to argue that she wasn't the most electable candidate of all candidates running this cycle.  What were her betting odds against Trump?  YUGE.  She looked like a lock.

There's a lot to argue post-mortem in this election regarding Hillary, but her electability shouldn't be one of them.  Her resume was pretty solid.

With that said, I was wouldn't have only been a Bernie voter, I would have been a Bernie supporter.  That to me is the biggest thing differentiating Bernie and Clinton. 

 
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
For what it's worth Tim, I agree with you that Hillary beating Bernie was not due to behind-the-scenes DNC shenanigans.

 I do think the perception that she was the more electable of the two candidates hurt him a lot.  I'm not sure how we could have convinced people otherwise.
Click to expand...
 Bernie supporters certainly tried. I didn't accept their arguments at the time, but I was unwilling to make my own arguments that she was more electable either. 

With few exemptions the establishment candidate usually wins. I don't think this is a bad thing. The Republican primary voters were ready for a rebellion this time around. The Democratic primary voters were not. 

 
timschochet said:
I guess it's amusing to laugh at people who are distraught by this result. Lena Dunham spent the last 18 months working hard to try to get Hillary Clinton elected because she believed in Hillary's cause; she thought Hillary would be what was best in for the country. Lena Dunham didn't earn any money working for Hillary. Nor did any of the other thousands of volunteers. You can disagree with them all you like, but I think it's pretty shameful to mock them. 
Click to expand...
If you take the time to actually read it I think you will see the crucial error that many supporters made:

"It was supposed to be her job. She worked her whole life for the job. It's her job."
Click to expand...
Because it just was.

 
timschochet said:
I agree with the fact that most people disagree with me. 
Click to expand...
Do you acknowledge facts such that:

1.  Bill was paid $16.5 million by Laureate University between 2010 and 2015.  

2.  Laureate also donated millions to the Clinton Foundation (and relationship was not disclosed as required by law).

3.  The IFC (World Bank) sent Laureate $150 million while Hillary was SoS, largest ever provided by IFC to educational institution.

4.  The US government is by far the largest contributor to the IFC.

5.  This 'university' offers no classes, grades, or degrees.

6.  While the Obama administration has effectively shut down two similar for profit universities, they have not touched Laureate.

It is dirty as hell.  But you never cared.  Even the average uninformed voter seem to be more clued in.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006 said:
47% of voters said she was not qualified.
Click to expand...
I'm not saying she wasn't flawed, or even that she was qualified.  But it's hard to argue with the bullet points on her resume.  Senator and Secretary of State is an above average combo.

It's hard for me to defend her electibility against Bernie, because I just loved Bernie.  Hillary just didn't have that, where people just loved her and wanted to follow her. 

 
Statorama said:
I'm not saying she wasn't flawed, or even that she was qualified.  But it's hard to argue with the bullet points on her resume.  Senator and Secretary of State is an above average combo.

It's hard for me to defend her electibility against Bernie, because I just loved Bernie.  Hillary just didn't have that, where people just loved her and wanted to follow her. 
Click to expand...
The resume has been well argued, and the number of people with cabinet level experience running is really limited. I'm the first to say that as to experience and  knowledge, Hillary was miles ahead of Trump. Actually, Trump had zero, so there really is no comparison to begin with. But that resume is filled with negative and positive. Bernie IMO always had a better lifetime resume, though he did not have the SOS position IMO overall it was better.

What really offended me about the Hillary/Bernie thing were the lies they told in painting him as an enemy of his own president and his own party. They said he was a betrayer of Obama, that he was pro gun manufacturer, and that he would take away people's health care. They said he would be painted as a red while wink winking that he really was and also that he had never accomplished anything. Their whole strategy against him was dishonest. I think as Trump showed in the open election he would have gotten a fairer hearing.

- eta - and oh btw Sanders handed Hillary one of the single greatest pieces of good fortune to happen to her when he did not convert the email and Foundation issues into policy positions, which they always were, in the fall. That did not stop her team from crushing his rep later.

No surprise that the last day of the convention Sanders quit the party. Now was that good for the Dem Party? No.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
During the primaries both you and squiston argued at great length that Hillary should be the nominee because of her electability.  When people disagreed with you guys, you were incredibly condescending, suggesting that anyone that thought Bernie was more electable was ridiculous.  You need to acknowledge how wrong you were.  You can't just start pointing out now that Hillary was a horrible candidate as if those discussions never happened.

It's fine to be wrong about stuff, and we really don't know for sure that you actually were wrong.  Maybe Bernie also would have blown it.  The infuriating part is that your posts don't seem to acknowledge that the argument you're making was one that was literally made to you in hundreds of posts that you dismissed as ill informed or biased or unrealistic.
Click to expand...
To be fair.....I think the "condescension" part of squis is just his writing style...not sure he's aware of it honestly.  The only "argument" he ever made about elect-ability was essentially "but wait until people start calling him names like socialist".....tough to be condescending with an "argument" like that.

 
I guess it's amusing to laugh at people who are distraught by this result. Lena Dunham spent the last 18 months working hard to try to get Hillary Clinton elected because she believed in Hillary's cause; she thought Hillary would be what was best in for the country. Lena Dunham didn't earn any money working for Hillary. Nor did any of the other thousands of volunteers. You can disagree with them all you like, but I think it's pretty shameful to mock them.
Click to expand...
Good point. There are plenty of other valid reasons to mock Lena Dunham.

 
Willie Neslon said:
Exactly. If you dared suggest to Tim, Squis, Gunz and whoever else that their heads were in the sand in regard to obvious warts of their candidate you were responded to in the most condescending of ways. Shameful behavior. It's people like them we can thank for the coming disaster.
Click to expand...
Has Gunz even bothered to check in?  At least Squish and Tim have come in and acknowledged they were wrong.  I haven't seen Gunz so my apologies if he has.

 
My daughter just walked in....

Her: "Hillary was going to be the first F President."

Me: "Wat? :confused: "

Her: "Yeah, she was going to be the first F President because the email got deleted."

So dumb but I still chuckled.

 
squistion said:
The National Audubon Society, protecting birds and their habitats:

https://action.audubon.org/onlineactions/ft2Xyh5SKkusnXQ0AnkjYQ2?ms=digital-fund-paid_social-fb-x-2016xxxx_acquisition_phase3_dd_ad2_cardinal_link&utm_source=fb&utm_medium=paid_social&utm_campaign=2016xxxx_acquisition_phase3_dd&utm_content=ad2_cardinal_link

Thank you for your contribution.
Click to expand...
Turns out, I love birds.  Donation made. 

As far as the election, I'm not going to gloat.  We're all in this together now. 

 
timschochet said:
 Bernie supporters certainly tried. I didn't accept their arguments at the time, but I was unwilling to make my own arguments that she was more electable either. 

With few exemptions the establishment candidate usually wins. I don't think this is a bad thing. The Republican primary voters were ready for a rebellion this time around. The Democratic primary voters were not engineered into voting for Clinton by collusion of DWS, Brazille, most media outlets, and many, many others in the DNC.  
Click to expand...
Fixed.

 
timschochet said:
I guess it's amusing to laugh at people who are distraught by this result. Lena Dunham spent the last 18 months working hard to try to get Hillary Clinton elected because she believed in Hillary's cause; she thought Hillary would be what was best in for the country. Lena Dunham didn't earn any money working for Hillary. Nor did any of the other thousands of volunteers. You can disagree with them all you like, but I think it's pretty shameful to mock them. 
Click to expand...
Paybacks a #####.

 
Yep, it's crazy to think back about how much we saw both on the cable news channels this year. Trump was everywhere for the majority of it and then scaled it back quite a bit the last few months. Meanwhile, Clinton was rarely seen doing a one-on-one interview.  Trump dominated the coverage and made a point to be seen everywhere.  Don't think that didn't make a big difference. 

 
Walking Boot said:
What's funny is she hid from the press, didn't take questions, and tried to run out the clock the whole campaign and she got up to about 48%.

The last week or so of the campaign, Trump did the same thing, when the Comey letter hit he went into low-visibility mode and stayed out of his own way. Went from 35% to 48% in like 11 days.
Click to expand...
That's what the left calls "openness and transparency".

 
Walking Boot said:
What's funny is she hid from the press, didn't take questions, and tried to run out the clock the whole campaign and she got up to about 48%.

The last week or so of the campaign, Trump did the same thing, when the Comey letter hit he went into low-visibility mode and stayed out of his own way. Went from 35% to 48% in like 11 days.
Click to expand...
Trump stopped doing press conferences 2 months before the Comey letter.

 
Walking Boot said:
What's funny is she hid from the press, didn't take questions, and tried to run out the clock the whole campaign and she got up to about 48%.

The last week or so of the campaign, Trump did the same thing, when the Comey letter hit he went into low-visibility mode and stayed out of his own way. Went from 35% to 48% in like 11 days.
Click to expand...
Tellyawhat, I really thought a. Hillary would drop one final oppo research bomb in the last week or weekend or b. Trump would say or do something extraordinarily stupid during that time. But, no, it did not happen.

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
Walking Boot said:
What's funny is she hid from the press, didn't take questions, and tried to run out the clock the whole campaign and she got up to about 48%.

The last week or so of the campaign, Trump did the same thing, when the Comey letter hit he went into low-visibility mode and stayed out of his own way. Went from 35% to 48% in like 11 days.
Click to expand...
Tellyawhat, I really thought a. Hillary would drop one final oppo research bomb in the last week or weekend or b. Trump would say or do something extraordinarily stupid during that time. But, no, it did not happen.
Click to expand...
It really seemed like Hillary thought she'd done enough to coast to the finish line in first place. If she had dropped one final bomb, it might have backfired, so she played it safe.

 
 
She is such garbage she was turning blue states red that never vote Republican. People that ignored all the evidence she is a criminal that worked the system deserve what they got. 

 
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
254K
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