Official Hillary Clinton 2016 thread (3 Viewers)

[RCon]

Why are you supporting Clinton?

well, in a lot of ways that graph tells the story.For instance the fact that Bernie opposed TARP demonstrates that he is an ideologue who puts his ideology ahead of pragmatism. That is EXACTLY why I don't want him. TARP was absolutely necessary; it prevented a 2nd Great Depression.

Highly debatable.

Of course, if Bernie had been making the rules, the situation never would have occurred in the first place.

 

[The Commish]

Why are you supporting Clinton?

well, in a lot of ways that graph tells the story.For instance the fact that Bernie opposed TARP demonstrates that he is an ideologue who puts his ideology ahead of pragmatism. That is EXACTLY why I don't want him. TARP was absolutely necessary; it prevented a 2nd Great Depression.

Highly debatable.Of course, if Bernie had been making the rules, the situation never would have occurred in the first place.

That's the boogeyman of which I was speaking. And I don't really care what the establishment economists were saying.

 

[cstu]

Really, I'm not sure what's so hard to believe. Sanders grew up poor. He used student loans to pay for college. Apparently he lived with his first wife in a house with no electricity or running water. He has one biological kid and 3 stepkids that he raised. His wife doesn't work, I don't know if she had student loans. It seems entirely plausible to me that he wouldn't have amassed great wealth.

His wife has a master's degree is sociology and was President of Burlington College from 2004-2011 (when she resigned in controversy) making up to $150,000 a year.

 

[elbowrm]

Lol about debating Tarp. Remember what the Dow did the day the bailout was first voted down? Goldman, MS, boa, Wachovia, citi would have all been toast. And the rest of the world economy with them.

 

[squistion]

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/hillary-clinton-appears-on-snl-as-a-bartender-to-give-herself-a-pep-talk/

Hillary Clinton Appears on SNL as a Bartender to Give 'Herself' a Pep Talk

Hillary Clinton made her not-so-secret cameo on SNL tonight as a bartender giving SNLs own Hillary Clinton a pep talk.

And Clinton took it in stride when Kate McKinnnon mocked Clinton for taking her sweet time to take positions on things like the Keystone pipeline and gay marriage.

They got in a swipe or two at Donald Trump before - and I'm being totally serious here - the two Clintons sang a power ballad together.

Watch above, via NBC (at link).

 

[cstu]

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/hillary-clinton-appears-on-snl-as-a-bartender-to-give-herself-a-pep-talk/

Hillary Clinton Appears on SNL as a Bartender to Give 'Herself' a Pep Talk

Hillary Clinton made her not-so-secret cameo on SNL tonight as a bartender giving SNLs own Hillary Clinton a pep talk.

And Clinton took it in stride when Kate McKinnnon mocked Clinton for taking her sweet time to take positions on things like the Keystone pipeline and gay marriage.

They got in a swipe or two at Donald Trump before - and I'm being totally serious here - the two Clintons sang a power ballad together.

Watch above, via NBC (at link).

That's the best thing she's ever done for her image.

 

[cstu]

Lol about debating Tarp. Remember what the Dow did the day the bailout was first voted down? Goldman, MS, boa, Wachovia, citi would have all been toast. And the rest of the world economy with them.

It's difficult for Republicans told admit that, yet again, their Party was on the wrong side of history. At least the President and the smart people in their party did the right thing and voted for it.

http://www.politifact.com/oregon/statements/2010/oct/18/kurt-schrader/kurt-schrader-says-more-republicans-democrats-vote/

Wall Street bailout (TARP)

Clinton and Sanders split their votes again on HR 1424, a bill taken up after the acceleration of the subprime mortgage crisis in 2008.

Clinton voted in favor of the measure, which in part created a $700 billion emergency bailout fund called the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP).

Sanders voted against it, writing in a statement that the relief package was "far better than the absurd proposal originally presented to us by the Bush administration, but is still short of where we should be."

While he opposed the version of TARP that passed, he did support TARP if the wealthy were taxed higher to pay for it:

"I proposed to raise the tax rate on any individual earning $500,000 a year or more or any family earning $1 million a year or more by 10 percent. That increase in the tax rate, from 35 percent to 45 percent, would raise more than $300 billion in the next five years, almost half the cost of the bailout. If what all the supporters of this legislation say is correct, that the government will get back some of its money when the market calms down and the government sells some of the assets it has purchased, then $300 billion should be sufficient to make sure that 99.7 percent of taxpayers do not have to pay one nickel for this bailout.

 

[jon_mx]

I would just like to say Hillary has an amazing collection of pantsuits.

 

[jon_mx]

I see from yesterday's discussion we are supposed to be amazed at Hillary's proper usage of racial slurs and drool over what a real genuine person that demonstrates her to be. One of the more interesting spins, which I assume was a terrible fishing trip.

 

[timschochet]

http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials-polls/100215-773897-donald-trump-trails-ben-carson-in-ibd-tipp-poll.htm

Hillary 42%, Joe 22%, Bernie 18%. And yeah this poll (which has proven to be the most accurate national poll) DOES matter. If you remove Joe (and I say he's not running) most of that goes to Hillary who has an even larger lead.

What cracks me up is that people continue to compare Hillary to Jeb Bush as the two "establishment" candidates who are not wanted this time around. Yet Jeb is at around 7%,and Hillary is at 42%. And even most of those who prefer Bernie Sanders would be happy with Hillary.

 

[MaxThreshold]

http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials-polls/100215-773897-donald-trump-trails-ben-carson-in-ibd-tipp-poll.htm

Hillary 42%, Joe 22%, Bernie 18%. And yeah this poll (which has proven to be the most accurate national poll) DOES matter. If you remove Joe (and I say he's not running) most of that goes to Hillary who has an even larger lead.

What cracks me up is that people continue to compare Hillary to Jeb Bush as the two "establishment" candidates who are not wanted this time around. Yet Jeb is at around 7%,and Hillary is at 42%. And even most of those who prefer Bernie Sanders would be happy with Hillary.

So the takeaway from this is that the poll only matters if it agrees with your statements?

I don't think ANYONE on the left would be happy with Hillary. I think you're confusing "happiness" with "resigned disgust".

 

[HellToupee]

http://www.suffolk.edu/news/61554.php#.VhEs2UuGtBU

A Suffolk University/USA TODAY national poll of likely Democratic voters shows former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton easily topping the Democratic field. Meanwhile, a majority of voters from all parties say they are bothered by Clinton’s email and Benghazi issues, but Democrats show more tolerance on these matters.

Clinton (41 percent) led Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders (23 percent) and Vice President Joe Biden (20 percent), while all other candidates together totaled 2 percent, and 14 percent of voters were undecided.

A majority of voters from all parties had concerns about the former secretary of state’s handling of her email and Benghazi. But 22 percent of Democratic voters said that her handling of the Benghazi situation bothered them and 44 percent said that it will hurt her in the general election. Thirty-three percent of Democrats said the email issue bothers them, and 60 percent say they believe it will hurt her in the general election.

“Some Clinton voters acknowledge that her handling of her emails and the Benghazi situation bothers them and that the issues could hurt her in the general election if she is the nominee,” said David Paleologos, director of the Suffolk University Political Research Center in Boston. “But for now, many are sticking by her, even though the race should shake up dramatically when the first official Democratic debate is held in less than two weeks.”

Some 60 percent of general-election voters said they were bothered by the email investigations, and 52 percent were bothered by her explanation of the Benghazi attack that killed two U.S. foreign service officials and two CIA contractors. Moreover, 70 percent of likely voters said that the email issue will hurt her in the general election if she is the Democratic nominee, and 59 percent said that her Benghazi explanation also would hurt her in the general election.

Clinton’s favorability was upside-down among voters from all parties: 39 percent favorable versus 51 percent unfavorable. Sanders was slightly positive overall with a 37 percent favorable and 33 percent unfavorable rating. Meanwhile, Biden, who has not declared a candidacy, was the most popular among all voters polled, with a 51 percent favorable rating and a 35 percent unfavorable rating.

Biden also was given more favorable descriptors than his Democratic opponents. When likely voters were asked what one word described the vice president, 12 percent said “favorable/like,” and 7 percent said “honest/honorable/integrity/trustworthy.” Three of the four top identifiers for Hillary Clinton were negatives, including “liar/dishonest” (13 percent), “untrustworthy/fake” (8 percent), and “deceitful/sneaky/tricky” (6 percent). However, 8 percent identified her as “smart/intelligent/knowledgeable.” The top identifier for Bernie Sanders was “socialist” (11 percent).

“Biden is seen in a much more favorable light than his opponents. His reputation and broad appeal makes people comfortable with him as a strong Democratic candidate with minimal baggage who is not considered extreme by the average voter,” said Paleologos.

With October marking the beginning of the Democratic debate season, 54 percent of Democratic voters said the Democratic National Committee should not sanction more debates beyond the six already approved, while 34 percent wanted to see more in the mix.

MethodologyThe nationwide survey of 1,000 voters likely to cast ballots in the 2016 presidential election was conducted Sept. 24-28 using live telephone interviews of households where respondents indicated they were very or somewhat likely to vote. The margin of error is +/-3 percentage points at a 95 percent level of confidence. The margin of error for the Democratic primary subset of 430 voters is +/- 4.7 percentage points. Marginals and full cross-tabulation data are posted on the Suffolk University Political

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

I see from yesterday's discussion we are supposed to be amazed at Hillary's proper usage of racial slurs and drool over what a real genuine person that demonstrates her to be. One of the more interesting spins, which I assume was a terrible fishing trip.

Racial slur?

 

[The_Man]

I almost never comment on polling stuff, but I feel the need to make one point - polls that include Biden are absolutely worthless right now.

In particular, I believe they tend to understate Bernie's support.

It's no secret that a wide range of Democrats are disgusted by Hillary. Many of these Democrats aren't big fans of Bernie either, but they are willing to support whatever non-Hillary candidate emerges. When a poll offers Biden as an option, they flock to him. But if Biden's not a candidate, those voters are going to have to go somewhere - most likely Bernie.

BTW, if Biden gets in this race, he cruises to the nomination. There are tons of Democratic politicians who endorsed Hillary a year ago and now can't wait to get off her sinking ship. They'll never go to Bernie, but the "unexpected" entry of Biden into the race would give them an excuse to back a previously undeclared candidate.

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

I still agree with Tim on one thing. Hillary wins the D election and then then the general election. Sanders will have a decent run but still loses. The Clinton war machine and liberal media will crush the R nominee.

You grossly over-estimate Hillary's abilitles. If the GOP somehow nominates even a half-way decent candidate, they can easily beat Hillary, who does not connect with people at all. Of course at this point, that is a big if.

What is this half way decent candidate you speak of?

 

[squistion]

http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials-polls/100215-773897-donald-trump-trails-ben-carson-in-ibd-tipp-poll.htm

Hillary 42%, Joe 22%, Bernie 18%. And yeah this poll (which has proven to be the most accurate national poll) DOES matter. If you remove Joe (and I say he's not running) most of that goes to Hillary who has an even larger lead.

What cracks me up is that people continue to compare Hillary to Jeb Bush as the two "establishment" candidates who are not wanted this time around. Yet Jeb is at around 7%,and Hillary is at 42%. And even most of those who prefer Bernie Sanders would be happy with Hillary.

So the takeaway from this is that the poll only matters if it agrees with your statements?

I don't think ANYONE on the left would be happy with Hillary. I think you're confusing "happiness" with "resigned disgust".

Yes, you are definitely qualified to speak for people on the left.

 

[timschochet]

I almost never comment on polling stuff, but I feel the need to make one point - polls that include Biden are absolutely worthless right now.

In particular, I believe they tend to understate Bernie's support.

It's no secret that a wide range of Democrats are disgusted by Hillary. Many of these Democrats aren't big fans of Bernie either, but they are willing to support whatever non-Hillary candidate emerges. When a poll offers Biden as an option, they flock to him. But if Biden's not a candidate, those voters are going to have to go somewhere - most likely Bernie.

BTW, if Biden gets in this race, he cruises to the nomination. There are tons of Democratic politicians who endorsed Hillary a year ago and now can't wait to get off her sinking ship. They'll never go to Bernie, but the "unexpected" entry of Biden into the race would give them an excuse to back a previously undeclared candidate.

The polling suggests you overestimate the disgust. I strongly disagree that if Biden were to enter he'd win the nomination. But I don't think we're going to find out.

 

[MaxThreshold]

http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials-polls/100215-773897-donald-trump-trails-ben-carson-in-ibd-tipp-poll.htm

Hillary 42%, Joe 22%, Bernie 18%. And yeah this poll (which has proven to be the most accurate national poll) DOES matter. If you remove Joe (and I say he's not running) most of that goes to Hillary who has an even larger lead.

What cracks me up is that people continue to compare Hillary to Jeb Bush as the two "establishment" candidates who are not wanted this time around. Yet Jeb is at around 7%,and Hillary is at 42%. And even most of those who prefer Bernie Sanders would be happy with Hillary.

So the takeaway from this is that the poll only matters if it agrees with your statements?

I don't think ANYONE on the left would be happy with Hillary. I think you're confusing "happiness" with "resigned disgust".

Yes, you are definitely qualified to speak for people on the left.

Am I wrong? Seems like it's you, Tim and TGunz are the only ones that are supremely happy with Hillary.

 

[cstu]

I would just like to say Hillary has an amazing collection of pantsuits.

There are plenty of reasons to not like Hillary, but it makes you look bad to attack her for being a woman.

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

All my suits have pants.

 

[jon_mx]

I would just like to say Hillary has an amazing collection of pantsuits.

There are plenty of reasons to not like Hillary, but it makes you look bad to attack her for being a woman.

Who is attacking her? Tim requested we say one thing nice about Hillary, and that is the best I could think of.

 

[squistion]

http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials-polls/100215-773897-donald-trump-trails-ben-carson-in-ibd-tipp-poll.htm

Hillary 42%, Joe 22%, Bernie 18%. And yeah this poll (which has proven to be the most accurate national poll) DOES matter. If you remove Joe (and I say he's not running) most of that goes to Hillary who has an even larger lead.

What cracks me up is that people continue to compare Hillary to Jeb Bush as the two "establishment" candidates who are not wanted this time around. Yet Jeb is at around 7%,and Hillary is at 42%. And even most of those who prefer Bernie Sanders would be happy with Hillary.

So the takeaway from this is that the poll only matters if it agrees with your statements?

I don't think ANYONE on the left would be happy with Hillary. I think you're confusing "happiness" with "resigned disgust".

Yes, you are definitely qualified to speak for people on the left.

Am I wrong? Seems like it's you, Tim and TGunz are the only ones that are supremely happy with Hillary.

If this forum was a real indication of public opinion, Romney would be running now for reelection. I don't think anyone here has said that they are "supremely happy" and if most Democrats were unhappy (you know, those on the left) she would not still be the strong favorite for the nomination.

 

[jon_mx]

If this forum was a real indication of public opinion, Romney would be running now for reelection. I don't think anyone here has said that they are "supremely happy" and if most Democrats were unhappy (you know, those on the left) she would not still be the strong favorite for the nomination.

About 60% of Democrats are not supporting Hillary and looking for other options.

 

[squistion]

If this forum was a real indication of public opinion, Romney would be running now for reelection. I don't think anyone here has said that they are "supremely happy" and if most Democrats were unhappy (you know, those on the left) she would not still be the strong favorite for the nomination.

About 60% of Democrats are not supporting Hillary and looking for other options.

Interesting interpretation of the polls, but I have not seen anything anywhere that says "60% of Democrats are looking for other options over Hillary". I guess that also means that 70% of Republicans are not supporting Trump and are also looking for other options.

 

[Sinn Fein]

If this forum was a real indication of public opinion, Romney would be running now for reelection. I don't think anyone here has said that they are "supremely happy" and if most Democrats were unhappy (you know, those on the left) she would not still be the strong favorite for the nomination.

About 60% of Democrats are not supporting Hillary and looking for other options.

Interesting interpretation of the polls, but I have not seen anything anywhere that says "60% of Democrats are looking for other options over Hillary". I guess that also means that 70% of Republicans are not supporting Trump and are also looking for other options.

That is correct. Most people/republicans do not want Trump as the nominee.

 

[squistion]

If this forum was a real indication of public opinion, Romney would be running now for reelection. I don't think anyone here has said that they are "supremely happy" and if most Democrats were unhappy (you know, those on the left) she would not still be the strong favorite for the nomination.

About 60% of Democrats are not supporting Hillary and looking for other options.

Interesting interpretation of the polls, but I have not seen anything anywhere that says "60% of Democrats are looking for other options over Hillary". I guess that also means that 70% of Republicans are not supporting Trump and are also looking for other options.

That is correct. Most people/republicans do not want Trump as the nominee.

Perhaps. But Rasmussen found "58% of Likely Republican Voters think Trump is likely to end up as their partys nominee for president in 2016." http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2016/trump_change. If that is the case, then it is a disconnect that the majority also do not want Trump to be the nominee.

 

[The Commish]

If this forum was a real indication of public opinion, Romney would be running now for reelection. I don't think anyone here has said that they are "supremely happy" and if most Democrats were unhappy (you know, those on the left) she would not still be the strong favorite for the nomination.

About 60% of Democrats are not supporting Hillary and looking for other options.

Interesting interpretation of the polls, but I have not seen anything anywhere that says "60% of Democrats are looking for other options over Hillary". I guess that also means that 70% of Republicans are not supporting Trump and are also looking for other options.

That is correct. Most people/republicans do not want Trump as the nominee.

Perhaps. But Rasmussen found "58% of Likely Republican Voters think Trump is likely to end up as their partys nominee for president in 2016." http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2016/trump_change. If that is the case, then it is a disconnect that the majority also do not want Trump to be the nominee.

I don't want Hillary to be the nominee but still think she is the most likely to be nominated. I would think most in this thread would agree. They are not mutually inclusive.

exactly

 

[squistion]

If this forum was a real indication of public opinion, Romney would be running now for reelection. I don't think anyone here has said that they are "supremely happy" and if most Democrats were unhappy (you know, those on the left) she would not still be the strong favorite for the nomination.

About 60% of Democrats are not supporting Hillary and looking for other options.

Interesting interpretation of the polls, but I have not seen anything anywhere that says "60% of Democrats are looking for other options over Hillary". I guess that also means that 70% of Republicans are not supporting Trump and are also looking for other options.

That is correct. Most people/republicans do not want Trump as the nominee.

Perhaps. But Rasmussen found "58% of Likely Republican Voters think Trump is likely to end up as their partys nominee for president in 2016." http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2016/trump_change. If that is the case, then it is a disconnect that the majority also do not want Trump to be the nominee.

I don't want Hillary to be the nominee but still think she is the most likely to be nominated. I would think most in this thread would agree. They are not mutually inclusive.

Most here are Republican or conservative so what they and Republicans in general think of Hillary's prospects of getting the nomination is not relevant to what really counts, which is what Democrats think. And I have yet to see the numbers to back the claim that most Democrats do not want Hillary to be the nominee outside of the fact she is still leading with 40%+. And these polls all now include Biden and if he doesn't enter the race, Hillary picks up most of his supporters and that I believe would take her over 50%.

 

[Sand]

Most here are Republican or conservative so what they and Republicans in general think of Hillary's prospects of getting the nomination is not relevant to what really counts, which is what Democrats think. And I have yet to see the numbers to back the claim that most Democrats do not want Hillary to be the nominee outside of the fact she is still leading with 40%+. And these polls all now include Biden and if he doesn't enter the race, Hillary picks up most of his supporters and that I believe would take her over 50%.

I do think Hillary ends up being the nominee. And that's a great thing for Republicans. Bernie would be slightly better, but I don't think he has a chance. Joe is a much scarier candidate in the general. I, for one, look forward to seeing how a Rubio/Kasich ticket does against Clinton/Weiner.

 

[The Commish]

Most people I know who are willing to actually identify as "republican" want Hillary as the nom. They believe they have a chance against her

 

[jon_mx]

Most here are Republican or conservative so what they and Republicans in general think of Hillary's prospects of getting the nomination is not relevant to what really counts, which is what Democrats think. And I have yet to see the numbers to back the claim that most Democrats do not want Hillary to be the nominee outside of the fact she is still leading with 40%+. And these polls all now include Biden and if he doesn't enter the race, Hillary picks up most of his supporters and that I believe would take her over 50%.

Most here hate Republicans more than they do Democrats. Pretty independent bunch who mostly supported Obama in the last couple elections. Very liberal concerning social issues and moderately conservative on fiscal matters.

 

[The Commish]

Most here are Republican or conservative so what they and Republicans in general think of Hillary's prospects of getting the nomination is not relevant to what really counts, which is what Democrats think. And I have yet to see the numbers to back the claim that most Democrats do not want Hillary to be the nominee outside of the fact she is still leading with 40%+. And these polls all now include Biden and if he doesn't enter the race, Hillary picks up most of his supporters and that I believe would take her over 50%.

Most here hate Republicans more than they do Democrats. Pretty independent bunch who mostly supported Obama in the last couple elections. Very liberal concerning social issues and moderately conservative on fiscal matters.

Look at the support for Bernie. These labels have become virtually meaningless because old establishment types assume if you don't like the D candidate you must be a R. Forget the fact that there is a good amount of support for other D candidates even if they are DINO. Gotta keep it simple for the spin zone guys....come on!

 

[squistion]

Most here are Republican or conservative so what they and Republicans in general think of Hillary's prospects of getting the nomination is not relevant to what really counts, which is what Democrats think. And I have yet to see the numbers to back the claim that most Democrats do not want Hillary to be the nominee outside of the fact she is still leading with 40%+. And these polls all now include Biden and if he doesn't enter the race, Hillary picks up most of his supporters and that I believe would take her over 50%.

Most here hate Republicans more than they do Democrats. Pretty independent bunch who mostly supported Obama in the last couple elections. Very liberal concerning social issues and moderately conservative on fiscal matters.

Talk about revisionist history.

 

[jon_mx]

Most here are Republican or conservative so what they and Republicans in general think of Hillary's prospects of getting the nomination is not relevant to what really counts, which is what Democrats think. And I have yet to see the numbers to back the claim that most Democrats do not want Hillary to be the nominee outside of the fact she is still leading with 40%+. And these polls all now include Biden and if he doesn't enter the race, Hillary picks up most of his supporters and that I believe would take her over 50%.

Most here hate Republicans more than they do Democrats. Pretty independent bunch who mostly supported Obama in the last couple elections. Very liberal concerning social issues and moderately conservative on fiscal matters.

Talk about revisionist history.

You are nuts.

Obama vs. McCain. Obama by 5 points.

Obama vs. McCain. Close, but Obama won.

Pretty independent bunch, IMO. Your views are slanted too much.

 

[squistion]

Most here are Republican or conservative so what they and Republicans in general think of Hillary's prospects of getting the nomination is not relevant to what really counts, which is what Democrats think. And I have yet to see the numbers to back the claim that most Democrats do not want Hillary to be the nominee outside of the fact she is still leading with 40%+. And these polls all now include Biden and if he doesn't enter the race, Hillary picks up most of his supporters and that I believe would take her over 50%.

Most here hate Republicans more than they do Democrats. Pretty independent bunch who mostly supported Obama in the last couple elections. Very liberal concerning social issues and moderately conservative on fiscal matters.

Talk about revisionist history.

You are nuts.

Obama vs. McCain. Obama by 5 points.

Obama vs. McCain. Close, but Obama won.

Pretty independent bunch, IMO. Your views are slanted too much.

Perhaps. A voluntary poll here is just about as valid as any voluntary internet poll. We don't know that the percentage who took the time to vote actually reflects the views of those who frequent this forum. Maybe it represents the majority, maybe it doesn't.

 

[timschochet]

My impression is that there are about 5 conservatives or libertarians for every progressive in this forum. Furthermore, most of the progressives in this forum tend to be VERY progressive and thus not inclined to favor a moderate like Hillary if there is any other more progressive alternative. Furthermore, the vast majority of politically interested people in this forum, both left and right, share a deep aversion to "establishment" political figures, preferring any independent alternative.

Is it any wonder that those of us who support Hillary Clinton are in a very small minority around here? Thankfully for us this forum is not at all representative of the public at large.

 

[The Commish]

This thread gets me through some tough weeks, so for that I'm thankful.

 

[timschochet]

This thread gets me through some tough weeks, so for that I'm thankful.

Hey I didn't know you were having problems; I hope everything's OK with you now. At least your Wolverines are doing well.

 

[BroncoFreak_2K3]

This thread gets me through some tough weeks, so for that I'm thankful.

Definitely has surpassed the Otis/Woz non-weightloss circlejerk thread as far as schtick value.

 

[The Commish]

This thread gets me through some tough weeks, so for that I'm thankful.

Hey I didn't know you were having problems; I hope everything's OK with you now.At least your Wolverines are doing well.

Well, I haven't had a roof on my house sense June 24th and my dad called me last week to tell me he had some sort of tumor in his pancreas. My brother lives in Columbia SC, so I'm helping down there where I can. All in all, nothing I can control so I make the best of it each day. All still first world problems for the most part. It's a matter of perspective.

 

[timschochet]

This thread gets me through some tough weeks, so for that I'm thankful.

Hey I didn't know you were having problems; I hope everything's OK with you now.At least your Wolverines are doing well.

Well, I haven't had a roof on my house sense June 24th and my dad called me last week to tell me he had some sort of tumor in his pancreas. My brother lives in Columbia SC, so I'm helping down there where I can. All in all, nothing I can control so I make the best of it each day. All still first world problems for the most part. It's a matter of perspective.

Very sorry about your dad.

 

[The Commish]

This thread gets me through some tough weeks, so for that I'm thankful.

Hey I didn't know you were having problems; I hope everything's OK with you now.At least your Wolverines are doing well.

Well, I haven't had a roof on my house since June 24th and my dad called me last week to tell me he had some sort of tumor in his pancreas. My brother lives in Columbia SC, so I'm helping down there where I can. All in all, nothing I can control so I make the best of it each day. All still first world problems for the most part. It's a matter of perspective.

Very sorry about your dad.

He just turned 70 and we have some of the best surgeons in the country for the procedure right at our back door, so while it sucks, it could be a lot worse.

 

[squistion]

My impression is that there are about 5 conservatives or libertarians for every progressive in this forum. Furthermore, most of the progressives in this forum tend to be VERY progressive and thus not inclined to favor a moderate like Hillary if there is any other more progressive alternative. Furthermore, the vast majority of politically interested people in this forum, both left and right, share a deep aversion to "establishment" political figures, preferring any independent alternative.

Is it any wonder that those of us who support Hillary Clinton are in a very small minority around here? Thankfully for us this forum is not at all representative of the public at large.

Also my impression. If this forum really leaned Democratic/liberal/progressive, then we wouldn't see the discussion in just about every political thread seemingly dominated by those on the right (unless they tend to express their opinion disproportionately).

 

[RCon]

Lumping conservatives in wth libertarians seems kind of silly. Why not lump progressives in with libertarians and calculate progressive/libertarian versus conservative?

 

[timschochet]

Lumping conservatives in wth libertarians seems kind of silly. Why not lump progressives in with libertarians and calculate progressive/libertarian versus conservative?

Doesn't matter. I only did so for the point of this thread- conservatives and libertarians are both opposed to Hillary Clinton.

I should add that I don't always believe everybody who claims they're a libertarian. I believe Ivan, and I believe you, and a few others. But some of the so-called libertarians around here are no different from conservatives on any major issue.

 

[Bogeys]

Lumping conservatives in wth libertarians seems kind of silly. Why not lump progressives in with libertarians and calculate progressive/libertarian versus conservative?

Doesn't matter. I only did so for the point of this thread- conservatives and libertarians are both opposed to Hillary Clinton.

I should add that I don't always believe everybody who claims they're a libertarian. I believe Ivan, and I believe you, and a few others. But some of the so-called libertarians around here are no different from conservatives on any major issue.

Aren't there some progressives that have posted in this thread (NCC off the top of my head) that are also opposed to Hillary?

I think you and Squistion are going by just a few very loud voices.

 

[timschochet]

Lumping conservatives in wth libertarians seems kind of silly. Why not lump progressives in with libertarians and calculate progressive/libertarian versus conservative?

Doesn't matter. I only did so for the point of this thread- conservatives and libertarians are both opposed to Hillary Clinton.

I should add that I don't always believe everybody who claims they're a libertarian. I believe Ivan, and I believe you, and a few others. But some of the so-called libertarians around here are no different from conservatives on any major issue.

Aren't there some progressives that have posted in this thread (NCC off the top of my head) that are also opposed to Hillary?

I think you and Squistion are going by just a few very loud voices.

Sure. I stated earlier that MOST progressives in this forum are going to be opposed to Hillary, as she is a moderate establishment figure.

 

[squistion]

Lumping conservatives in wth libertarians seems kind of silly. Why not lump progressives in with libertarians and calculate progressive/libertarian versus conservative?

Not wanting to get into an argument about semantics again - however most progressives who are Democrats use the term progressive and liberal interchangeably (people such as NCC notwithstanding). I call myself a progressive but I am not close to being a libertarian, as I am not in favor of phasing out or ending Social Security and abolishing Medicare, etc.

 

[Bogeys]

Lumping conservatives in wth libertarians seems kind of silly. Why not lump progressives in with libertarians and calculate progressive/libertarian versus conservative?

Doesn't matter. I only did so for the point of this thread- conservatives and libertarians are both opposed to Hillary Clinton.

I should add that I don't always believe everybody who claims they're a libertarian. I believe Ivan, and I believe you, and a few others. But some of the so-called libertarians around here are no different from conservatives on any major issue.

Aren't there some progressives that have posted in this thread (NCC off the top of my head) that are also opposed to Hillary?

I think you and Squistion are going by just a few very loud voices.

Sure. I stated earlier that MOST progressives in this forum are going to be opposed to Hillary, as she is a moderate establishment figure.

Okay, just seems like that would make Rich's point...but I do remember you saying that earlier.

 

[The Commish]

Lumping conservatives in wth libertarians seems kind of silly. Why not lump progressives in with libertarians and calculate progressive/libertarian versus conservative?

Reality is, everyone outside of the establishment democrats (no point in even suggesting "liberal", "left", "progressive" whatever.....those words have very little meaning here in the FFA) are looking elsewhere for options. Establishment democrats will vote for her just because she's a democrat. I really wish they'd keep track of the amount of people who write in candidates. Would be really interesting this election cycle.