Official Hillary Clinton 2016 thread (2 Viewers)

[timschochet]

I'm sure there will be plenty of attacks by Clinton surrogates this summer on Trump University, the KKK comments, his long history of racism, etc. But Hillary shouldnt partake herself, and this stuff isn't going to beat Trump IMO. Trump has already said he's going to be talking about Hillary's emails every day. Fine; let him. 

Hillary should attack Trump, but attack him on the issues. Trump thinks climate change is a myth. Trump wants to deport 12 million illegals and build a wall and reduce legal immigration as well. Trump's response to police shootings of black is to defend the police and arm them more. Trump wants to start trade wars with China and Mexico. Trump wants to nominate anti-abortion SC justices. Trump wants to eliminate minimum wage and lower tax rates for billionaires. 

But the contrast that will be most important for the debates is that everything Trump proposes is half-baked- he doesn't have any details for his plans because there aren't any. Hillary needs to show enough of her wonkyness for the public to get the picture that she is competent and he isn't. 

 

[The Commish]

So much for the theory that the black vote is down. According to CBS news in the radio, blacks were the one segment of the Democratic vote that is energized. And get this: in South Carolina and last night they voted for Hillary in LARGER numbers than they did for Obama in 2008! 

X

Forget it....he's rolling.

 

[Aerial Assault]

I voted Rubio yesterday in VA.  He's pretty much a dud at this point though.  

I'd be open to voting Democrat, but not for Hillary for sure.  You can't even fathom how elitist and entitled she is.  Even the mid level Democrats here in the DC area can't stand her.  They hate her, but she's the best option so what else are they going to do.  I will give her credit for weaseling her way to the top by sucking up to (read buying up) the Democratic Party elites.

So me showing up to vote for Trump depends on his full ticket.  Is he going to bring in people that can get it done?

1. He's lightened up on Cruz, so he figures somewhere.  Maybe as VP.  I don't like the guy very much though. 

2. He's always gone soft on Carson, and Carson needs to play a huge rule.  Perhaps VP, but he's certainly got to be slated as the fixer of Medicare, Social Security, Education, Health Issues, etc.  He will pull some of the African Americans back to Trump.  Not the majority, but some.

3. I think he's trashed Rubio to the point he's not involved.  Too bad because I think Rubio as #2 would have been huge. Hispanics. Women. He has appeal to a lot of people unconcerned with the power act.  Would have been a nice bridge to the political leaders.

4. He'll pull in Christie as AG.  I don't think it does much for Trump though.  Christie is more of a loose cannon than Trump has even been.

5. He desperately needs a woman involved.  Carson will perhaps bring a few women over if he's VP.  I don't think Fiorina moves the needle for him.  She's just another business person.  Condoleezza Rice???  But she's probably too happy playing Augusta National to go back to the grind of DC.  Kelly Ayotte as Sec of State maybe?  Not a big name to most, but a sharp woman for sure.

At least it's fun this year.  I can't remember laughing this much at what was going on since seeing Dukakis riding around in the tank.

Thanks for these thoughts, but I suspect you don't have your finger too firmly on the pulse of "mid-level Democrats in the DC area," whatever that may mean.  It's strange that Clinton is allegedly so detestable, but is somehow defeating Bernie Sanders with more ease than many appear to have expected.  It almost makes you think that Clinton's purportedly bottomless personality problems are the creation of about 25 years of sustained (and empty) right-wing attacks, and the confirmation bias of dittoheads and others who seem to be threatened by her. 

Anyway, Ben Carson doesn't need to play a huge role in, well, just about anything, really.  Cruz on the GOP ticket is self-inflicted poison so that sounds good and should be ardently pursued.  Condoleezza Rice was aptly followed in your post by three question marks, which should be the required suffix whenever her name is mentioned.  Nice call.  Christie as attorney general is, I assume, a bit of fey fun on your part.  Kelly Ayotte will hopefully be no longer in government in January of 2017, but if she is, be advised that she is an extreme intellectual lightweight with no foreign policy credentials.     

I will say one thing in agreement with you - anyone considering voting for Trump should definitely think about who would play a role in his hypothetical administration, and some of the picks might be non-traditional, hence the need for some thought.  By contrast, Robotio would probably surround himself with anyone on hand from the last Bush administration, up to and including **** Cheney. 

 

[RCon]

Do you have a link or any research whatsoever to back up this claim?  I'm under the impression that total costs (premiums + deductibles + copays + etc.) have soared for the middle class.

They're all over the Internet. Here's one from last year: 

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/study-premium-growth-slowed-after-obamacare/

Moving this over to the Obamacare thread: https://forums.footballguys.com/forum/topic/695973-obamacare-obama-just-straight-up-lied-to-you-in-your-face/?do=findComment&comment=18919642

But in summary, as usual, your link says something other than what think it says.

 

[humpback]

So much for the theory that the black vote is down. According to CBS news in the radio, blacks were the one segment of the Democratic vote that is energized. And get this: in South Carolina and last night they voted for Hillary in LARGER numbers than they did for Obama in 2008! 

X

You do this quite often- would you say that the reason you get things so wrong is more:

A- you make things up to fit your worldview by saying that you saw or heard something on TV, the radio, at the local black barbershop, etc.

B- you are mis-seeing, hearing, etc. things completely, making reality very different from what you thought you saw/heard

C- you are hearing/seeing correctly, but your biased "sources" are the ones getting pretty much everything wrong

D- all of the above

 

[timschochet]

You do this quite often- would you say that the reason you get things so wrong is more:

A- you make things up to fit your worldview by saying that you saw or heard something on TV, the radio, at the local black barbershop, etc.

B- you are mis-seeing, hearing, etc. things completely, making reality very different from what you thought you saw/heard

C- you are hearing/seeing correctly, but your biased "sources" are the ones getting pretty much everything wrong

Well gee this is an interesting set of choices. But I will take D- I heard on CBS News Radio this morning that a larger number of African-Americans in South Carolina and a few other southern states- I think Georgia and Alabama were mentioned- voted in these primaries than they did in 2008 and that Hillary received a higher percentage of their vote than Obama did in 2008. Which is exactly what I posted. 

 

[humpback]

You do this quite often- would you say that the reason you get things so wrong is more:

A- you make things up to fit your worldview by saying that you saw or heard something on TV, the radio, at the local black barbershop, etc.

B- you are mis-seeing, hearing, etc. things completely, making reality very different from what you thought you saw/heard

C- you are hearing/seeing correctly, but your biased "sources" are the ones getting pretty much everything wrong

Well gee this is an interesting set of choices. But I will take D- I heard on CBS News Radio this morning that a larger number of African-Americans in South Carolina and a few other southern states- I think Georgia and Alabama were mentioned- voted in these primaries than they did in 2008 and that Hillary received a higher percentage of their vote than Obama did in 2008. Which is exactly what I posted.

I added a choice "D- all of the above", which probably is the right call.

If that is what you heard, they were dead wrong.  Far fewer African-Americans voted in every one of those states so far.  Hillary did receive a higher percentage (in some, not all), but not nearly as many in number.

 

[The Commish]

Well gee this is an interesting set of choices. But I will take D- I heard on CBS News Radio this morning that a larger number of African-Americans in South Carolina and a few other southern states- I think Georgia and Alabama were mentioned- voted in these primaries than they did in 2008 and that Hillary received a higher percentage of their vote than Obama did in 2008. Which is exactly what I posted. 

She got a larger %.  No question about that, but the turnout numbers weren't close to what they were in 2008 for Obama.  Whoever you heard that from was completely wrong.

 

[timschochet]

I don't know guys, do you have a link about the turnout? Because this article here from ABC news about South Carolina: 

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/live-south-carolina-democratic-primary-exit-poll-analysis/story?id=37241467

refers to a "record turnout" by black voters. Are they wrong? 

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

Whatever happened to Friday's sure-fire e-mail revelation bombshells?  I literally haven't heard a word about them.  MSM doing Hill a solid?

:cue SiD signal:

 

[humpback]

I don't know guys, do you have a link about the turnout? Because this article here from ABC news about South Carolina: 

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/live-south-carolina-democratic-primary-exit-poll-analysis/story?id=37241467

refers to a "record turnout" by black voters. Are they wrong? 

It's probably not technically wrong, but it's certainly misleading.  In terms of %, it may have been a record turnout, but not close in terms of overall number of voters.

I give it

 

[Card Trader]

It's probably not technically wrong, but it's certainly misleading.  In terms of %, it may have been a record turnout, but not close in terms of overall number of voters.

I give it

Voter turnout for the dems in SC was down 30% so this is correct

 

[jon_mx]

It's probably not technically wrong, but it's certainly misleading.  In terms of %, it may have been a record turnout, but not close in terms of overall number of voters.

I give it

The record is for the percentage of total, not the overall black turnout.  It is very misleading in how it is stated there and repeated elsewhere.  It is clearly not saying what Tim is implying. 

 

[Card Trader]

The record is for the percentage of total, not the overall black turnout.  It is very misleading in how it is stated there and repeated elsewhere.  It is clearly not saying what Tim is implying. 

Is anything ever true that Tim implies?

 

[jonessed]

Glad to know you don't think 10% of the electorate really matters.  Newsflash is you lose the AA vote 90-10 and the Hispanic vote 80-20, Trump would basically need to win the white vote 70-30 (Romney won it 59-39 for some comparison).  Good luck with that.   

They will always vote Democrat, turn out in low numbers, and aren't growing.  Targeting them is a waste of time and money.

 

[The Commish]

The record set was the number of absentee ballots at around 53,000.  They were expecting between 290,000 and 400,000 votes in the democratic primary this go around.  In 2008 they had 530,000+ 

ETA:  Either Tim heard wrong, they said it wrong or a combo of the both.  Tim's yet to produce an article that supports his claim.  The article isn't saying what he wants it to say.

 

[timschochet]

Hey look I'm only talking about numbers of black voters and only going by what I've read and heard. If anyone can post or link the exact number of black voters in the 2008 South Carolina primary vs last Satirday I will accept those figures. 

 

[Card Trader]

Hey look I'm only talking about numbers of black voters and only going by what I've read and heard. If anyone can post or link the exact number of black voters in the 2008 South Carolina primary vs last Satirday I will accept those figures. 

Black voters accounted for 61% of all voters, vs 55% in 2008.  Overall voters were down 30%.  Is this really that hard to grasp?  Is this real life?

 

[humpback]

My rough numbers based on CNN and NBC polling data:


 


 


Total AA votes


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


2008


2016


Obama


Clinton


South Carolina


293K


225K


228K


196K


Georgia


527K


382K


464K


325K


Alabama


267K


208K


224K


190K

 

[jonessed]

I don't know guys, do you have a link about the turnout? Because this article here from ABC news about South Carolina: 

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/live-south-carolina-democratic-primary-exit-poll-analysis/story?id=37241467

refers to a "record turnout" by black voters. Are they wrong? 

You are awful with numbers

 

[The Commish]

Hey look I'm only talking about numbers of black voters and only going by what I've read and heard. If anyone can post or link the exact number of black voters in the 2008 South Carolina primary vs last Satirday I will accept those figures. 

I'll try it a different way.

In 2008 55% of the people who voted in SC were black.  There were 530,000ish who voted.  that's 295,000

In 2016 approx 67% were black voters.  There was approximated 367,000ish who voted.  That's  245000.

I'll let you figure out which one is greater than the other.

 

[Card Trader]

My rough numbers based on CNN and NBC polling data:


 


 


Total AA votes


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


2008


2016


Obama


Clinton


South Carolina


293K


225K


228K


196K


Georgia


527K


382K


464K


325K


Alabama


267K


208K


224K


190K

I don't know guy, look at that article, it pretty clearly states not at all what I think it does!

-Tim

 

[The Commish]

If you don't want to listen to us, read this article

 

[humpback]

This is why I asked the question.  Tim seems like a reasonably intelligent person, he's in commercial real estate so I have to assume he understands very basic math at least, yet he does this over and over.

 

[The Commish]

This is why I asked the question.  Tim seems like a reasonably intelligent person, he's in commercial real estate so I have to assume he understands very basic math at least, yet he does this over and over.

I don't know Tim and can only go by what he presents here.  To me, he seems to go at it a bit backwards.  He seems to listen to other opinions on a topic.  He then forms his opinion and looks for "evidence" to support that opinion.

 

[JuniorNB]

So quit thinking about yourself and read any one of 1 million non partisan articles that demonstrate how skyrocketing costs have torpedoed the middle class.

Only if you agree to think of the 16 million Americans who now have health insurance who didn't before the Healthcare Act. Like Welfare and other social programs, it helps some and hurts others. And the greedy, selfish people whine about helping those less fortunate.

 

[TripItUp]

Only if you agree to think of the 16 million Americans who now have health insurance who didn't before the Healthcare Act. Like Welfare and other social programs, it helps some and hurts others. And the greedy, selfish people whine about helping those less fortunate.

Correct. I don't believe healthcare is a right.  It's a privilege that you should work for. 

90% of the country has every opportunity to be middle class or even better.  If you don't get there, it's your own damn fault. 

Punishing the middle class with Obamacare to fund those that didn't take advantage of their opportunity...not American and not fair.

 

[Skoo]

Funny, a few years ago Universal Healthcare was the absolute worst possible thing Republicans could imagine. They voted over 50 times to repeal it.

But now that Trump is for it, they're all about it!

"WE DON'T WANT BERNIE AND HIS SOCIALISM, WE WANT UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE!!"

 

[JuniorNB]

Correct. I don't believe healthcare is a right.  It's a privilege that you should work for. 

90% of the country has every opportunity to be middle class or even better.  If you don't get there, it's you own damn fault. 

LOLOL 

 

[squistion]

Voter turnout for the dems in SC was down 30% so this is correct

I think people are making too much of this. In 2008 it was still a horse race in SC between Obama/Clinton with Edwards in the mix.

In 2016 Bernie didn't even campaign in SC the last few days and the conventional wisdom was starting to form that Hillary had emerged as the presumptive nominee. A lot of folks may have stayed home for that reason. Meanwhile the contest on the GOP was starting to go in Trumps direction, but it wasn't to the point the narrative had emerged that Trump had pretty much locked it up.

A more competitive race will logically bring out more voters, a less competitive race, less voters. I think a Trump versus Hillary contest will bring out a lot of voters, particularly Democrats, independents, woman and minorities who are frightened at the prospect of a Trump presidency (offsetting the Hillary haters who are motivated to the polls because she is the nominee).

 

[timschochet]

OK I accept that what I heard was misleading. My apologies. 

 

[Skoo]

A more competitive race will logically bring out more voters, a less competitive race, less voters. I think a Trump versus Hillary contest will bring out a lot of voters, particularly Democrats, independents, woman and minorities who are frightened at the prospect of a Trump presidency (offsetting the Hillary haters who are motivated to the polls because she is the nominee).

ding ding ding!

 

[squistion]

Correct. I don't believe healthcare is a right.  It's a privilege that you should work for. 

90% of the country has every opportunity to be middle class or even better.  If you don't get there, it's your own damn fault. 

Punishing the middle class with Obamacare to fund those that didn't take advantage of their opportunity...not American and not fair.

The Donald doesn't seem to agree with you:
 

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc-quick-cuts/watch/trump-i-won-t-let-people-die-in-the-streets-631593027801

Trump: I won't let people die in the streets

 

[Gr00vus]

ding ding ding!

Yeah, I've been trying to temper the expectations of some of the Trump supporters in the Trump threads, as they seem to be accelerating their smugness. I think Trump will get buried in the general election unless he does a hard left back track after he wins the R nomination because there's just a huge set of demographic components that will have plenty of motivation to come out and vote against him.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Funny, a few years ago Universal Healthcare was the absolute worst possible thing Republicans could imagine. They voted over 50 times to repeal it.

But now that Trump is for it, they're all about it!

"WE DON'T WANT BERNIE AND HIS SOCIALISM, WE WANT UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE!!"

Well to be fair for years Dems have claimed that the GOP is trying to roll back LBJ and even FDR's programs, and they have demanded that must stop -  well now we have a Republican who is advocating big state - this is what it looks like.

 

[TripItUp]

The Donald doesn't seem to agree with you:
 

Correct.

 

[squistion]

Correct.

So, do you believe that if people can't afford or don't have health insurance, they should be denied access to an ER? They (including children) should be allowed to die on the street? If so, that seems a little callous and hard hearted.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

So, do you believe that if people can't afford or don't have health insurance, they should be denied access to an ER? They (including children) should be allowed to die on the street? If so, that seems a little callous and hard hearted.

If I could interject, what cracks me up is anyone believes Trump's statement that he cares if someone "dies on the street."

It's also such a weird line to draw, he's going to destroy the ACA but hey no one's going to die on the street. Why do they have to get to the street?

Also, this is the same guy that was trying to push military vets off of 5th Avenue despite having a legislative right to be there to sell their wares and make a living since the Civil War. That was an actual street, not a figurative one.

 

[TripItUp]

So, do you believe that if people can't afford or don't have health insurance, they should be denied access to an ER? They (including children) should be allowed to die on the street?

My healthcare plan is rather nuanced but in general, I'm okay with giving emergency care and preventive care to those that never had an opportunity to attain the wealth to pay for it(that's a very small percentage.)  Those born into poverty, mentally ill etc. etc.  I'm also fully supportive of free everything for children through age 18.

I'm not okay with giving free healthcare to:

1) those that had the opportunity to make something of themselves and pissed it away

2) Those that came into harm via negligence(drunk driving, unprotected sex etc.)

3) Illegal, adult immigrants(exception for children)

 

[The Commish]

OK I accept that what I heard was misleading. My apologies. 

There's nothing to apologize for.  I'd recommend looking into things for yourself a bit more rather than listening to all the  though.  There's been a lot of topics discussed here that you use the same pattern.  The approach is leading you astray.

 

[spreagle]

I think what Trump is saying is if you are a street runner AND NOT A FATTY he won't let you die in the streets.  I am a runner/weightlifter who tries very hard to stay in exceptional physical shape, my cumulative healthcare costs have been near zero for 50 years, and I object to paying for the healthcare of lazy fatties with one foot in the grave.  

 

[Loan Sharks]

Good Luck to you then! He he he

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Good Luck to you then! He he he

- That is so gutsy to walk up to a major presidential candidate and give her/him a piece of mind like that.

 

[Hov34]

Good Luck to you then! He he he

What a c word.  And that laugh at the end.   Some want 4 years of that?
 

 

[Gr00vus]

I can't really hear/understand much of what's being said in that clip - transcript anyone? Something about representing Somalian Americans.

Not a fan of the condescending tone she seems to slip into all too frequently in these situations. She often doesn't talk with people, she talks at them.

 

[lod01]

Make America 'whole' again? What a stupid twit. Can't even think for herself.

 

[17seconds]

What a c word.  And that laugh at the end.   Some want 4 years of that?
 

Now imagine it was Trump.

 

[Baloney Sandwich]

Make America 'whole' again? What a stupid twit. Can't even think for herself.

Sid came up with that one for her

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Brock: 'We’ve been doing research on Donald Trump for months'

http://www.politico.com/blogs/2016-dem-primary-live-updates-and-results/2016/03/david-brock-donald-trump-research-220123#ixzz41mzYDUrw
 
 
- David Brock is sharpening his steely knives.

 

[Baloney Sandwich]

So we have the two most disliked Presidential candidates in history and they are about to savage each other for 6 months.  Whoever can maintain a favorability rating above 35% will win.