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.
cstu said:
Even if Hillary only cares about Hillary then that means she going to do whatever it takes to get re-elected and she can't do that without sticking to the Democratic platform.  Also, if she's so self-interested she'll want to be leave her legacy as a great President.  It's surprising that after watching the way Bill governed people are so concerned about Hillary. 
Click to expand...
If she's proven two things, it's:

1) She can take great liberties and get away with it

2) She can be incredibly ineffective and disliked and still win

Her special combination of rigged machinery and voting demographics means she probably will get re-elected even if she does shamelessly serve her own interests 

 
Last edited:
Voter Grills Clinton: "For The Sake Of Transparency, Are You Going To Release Your Wall Street Transcripts?"


QUESTION: Good morning, Sec. Clinton. Over the past couple of days -- maybe a couple of weeks ago-- you were calling on Sen. Sanders to release his tax returns, which he did. And you were calling for more transparency, so for the sake of transparency, and just being fair, are you going to release your Wall Street transcripts?

HILLARY CLINTON: Well that is a good question. It is a very fair question. And let me answer it this way. I have released 33 years of tax returns, and you can go to my website and see the last eight years of my tax returns. That is the standard that has been set for years...

Now there is a new request. To release transcripts of speeches that were given. When everybody agrees to do that, I will as well. It is important we all abide by the same standards. So let's do the tax return standard first, because that has been the standard for a long time.
Click to expand...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
cobalt_27 said:
No small thing, he worked to push through health care.  He got it done.  Whether you think it's phenomenal, a good start, or the worst thing ever, there's no denying the fact that he got results.  Hillary, on the other hand...
Click to expand...
It was the 90's for crying out loud, nobody could have pushed it through then and the insurance companies went all out in an ad campaign against her health plan. She deserves credit for being ahead of her time, for trying and for being willing to take the political risk that it would fail. Only the Hillary haters see this as a black mark against her.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
squistion said:
It was the 90's for crying out loud, nobody could have pushed it through then and the insurance companies went all out in an ad campaign against her health plan. She deserves credit for being ahead of her time, for trying and for being willing to take the political risk that it would fail. Only the Hillary haters see this as a black mark against her.
Click to expand...
She actually avoided political risk by keeping the proceedings and even the invitees secret. It was her process and method which helped doom it.

 
Clinton: 'We can’t ignore the Second Amendment'


...Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton sought to strike a balance between Second Amendment rights and addressing gun violence at a campaign rally in Pennsylvania on Friday. 

“I know how important gun ownership and particularly hunting is here in northeastern Pennsylvania,” the former Secretary of State said. 

But Clinton said the United States can’t ignore gun violence. 

“I want you to know that we can’t ignore the Second Amendment and we can’t ignore the 33,000 people a year who die from gun violence,” she said. “And I think we are smart enough to figure out how to do that.” 
Click to expand...
http://www.thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/277392-clinton-we-cant-ignore-the-second-amendment

 
Last edited by a moderator:
timschochet said:
I don't get it. Usually when you link stuff there is an implied criticism of Hillary. What exactly is there to criticize here? 
Click to expand...
I'm glad you approve. I think you're usually more forthright and consistent in your beliefs, you just project Hillary as being so.

It's the same woman who has been calling Sanders an NRA tool for the past month or so, I'd say this position is more pro-gun than Sanders' in that I don't think I've ever heard him explicitly lean on the 2nd Amendment.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006 said:
I'm glad you approve. I think you're usually more forthright and consistent in your beliefs, you just project Hillary as being so.

It's the same woman who has been calling Sanders an NRA tool for the past month or so, I'd say this position is more pro-gun than Sanders' in that I don't think I've ever heard him explicitly lean on the 2nd Amendment.
Click to expand...
I'm torn here, because I like to see nuanced positions.  But when you try to score points and discredit your opponent in a debate and then pander to the other side based on regional polling like the other didn't happen...

Sounds like someone who makes more than $12 per hour.  Or was it $15?  I can't remember.

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
I'm glad you approve. I think you're usually more forthright and consistent in your beliefs, you just project Hillary as being so.

It's the same woman who has been calling Sanders an NRA tool for the past month or so, I'd say this position is more pro-gun than Sanders' in that I don't think I've ever heard him explicitly lean on the 2nd Amendment.
Click to expand...
I was at the rally last night. Her pitch is one of sensible reform. She talked about how anytime you start talking about gun reforms you are labeled a gun grabber when that's not true. But we need to do better when it comes to mentally handicapped and dangerous people having access to guns. No idea where the inconsistency is?

 
Trey said:
I was at the rally last night. Her pitch is one of sensible reform. She talked about how anytime you start talking about gun reforms you are labeled a gun grabber when that's not true. But we need to do better when it comes to mentally handicapped and dangerous people having access to guns. No idea where the inconsistency is?
Click to expand...
Number of times she's mentioned protecting the 2nd Amendment before getting to PA?

 
Trey said:
But we need to do better when it comes to mentally handicapped and dangerous people having access to guns.
Click to expand...
This was Sanders' position on Sandy Hook. If manufacturers knew or should have known that guns would get into the hands of people who would commit dangerous acts they should be sued. Not everyone shot by a gun should be able to sue.

Sounds like Hillary's position.

Did she mention the ability to sue manufacturers at the rally?

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
Dr. Jill Stein ‏@DrJillStein 18h18 hours ago
Hillary’s argument that accepting corporate :moneybag: doesn’t influence her w/out proof of quid pro quo is the same GOP argument for Citizens United
:shrug:
Click to expand...
timschochet said:
And I need to stress again that I hate this whole discussion because I like our current system. Interest groups on both sides contribute to candidates, pressure candidates, influence candidates. That includes corporations. Unless there is some kind of direct quod pro quo, none of this is corrupt. And it leads to a lot of good things. We can tinker with this system but there's no need to tear it down. It's pluralism and it's good.
Click to expand...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006 said:
This was Sanders' position on Sandy Hook. If manufacturers knew or should have known that guns would get into the hands of people who would commit dangerous acts they should be sued. Not everyone shot by a gun should be able to sue.

Sounds like Hillary's position.

Did she mention the ability to sue manufacturers at the rally?
Click to expand...
Yes she did. 

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
She actually avoided political risk by keeping the proceedings and even the invitees secret. It was her process and method which helped doom it.
Click to expand...
That's the way both her and Bill operate - check the polls and take no chances.  My hope is that she's the last of that breed for the Democrats.

 
Sand said:
Kinda shocked these haven't leaked.  There have to be a ton of people out there trying to dig these up.
Click to expand...
I wonder if Heidi Cruz has connections at Goldman Sachs.

I didn't realize she had such a political background...

Heidi Suzanne Cruz (née Nelson; August 7, 1972) is an American investment manager atGoldman Sachs. She served in the Bush White House as the economic director for the Western Hemisphere at the National Security Council, as the director of the Latin America Office at the U.S. Treasury Department, as Special Assistant to U.S. Trade Representative Robert B. Zoellick, and as economic policy advisor to the 2000 George W. Bush presidential campaign. She is thewife of Republican Texas senator and 2016U.S. presidential candidate Ted Cruz.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Transcripts are a non-issue once the general election comes around - republican don't care that she is pro-Wall Street, and they have enough other material to hit her with, this won't even be a blip on the radar.

 
Sinn Fein said:
Transcripts are a non-issue once the general election comes around - republican don't care that she is pro-Wall Street, and they have enough other material to hit her with, this won't even be a blip on the radar.
Click to expand...
Trump would absolutely hit her with it. He's already talked about how politicians can be bought and how he has bought them. Remember he said Hillary came to his wedding because he told her to. He'll stoke the issue. Claim he already has money and can't be bought.

 
cap'n grunge said:
I'm no liberal. I'm a pragmatic centrist who wants competent, effective, and efficient governance. I want the petulant children in DC gone. I want adults that will work together for the greater good.

I want the US to extricate itself from unnecessary and damaging wars of regime change, and yet i want us to annihilate terrorists and their sponsors with extreme prejudice.

I want an energy revolution that makes climate change less of a long term issue. I want the US to be at the forefront of revolutionary technology that we can export to the rest of the world.

I want trade agreements that actually work for Americans and not just global conglomerates who are benefiting on a race to the bottom on wages. I also want comprehensive immigration reform that makes sense. We are not going to round up millions of people and break up families. That is not America. We need to get those that are already here to come out of the shadows and become taxpaying productive members of society. We need secure borders and an easier program for guest workers and legal citizenship.

I want massive investments in infrastructure to fix our roads, bridges, and electrical grid. I want high speed internet access for all.

I want to take the best education systems we can find throughout the country and plant these ideas with supportive funding, especially in poor socioeconomic areas so we can help end the cycle of poverty, crime, and hopelessness in these communities.

I want our debt issue to be at the center of all debate. We need structural changes in entitlements. We need to remove the cap on SS taxes. We need to make some hard choices, whether that be gradually increasing the retirement age for benefits or also increasing payroll taxes. I would like to see a small portion of SS funds invested in areas that have the potential for a higher return.

Healthcare must be reformed. I don't know if single payer is the answer or not. If not we probably still need to decouple health insurance from employers. Competition under a heavier hand of price regulation may be the answer. There are no easy fixes here but there has got to be a way to make our system more efficient.

We need to reform our tax code and greatly simplify it. We need to bring corporate profits back home and tax them. Our wealth distribution and it's trend into the hands of a few is not healthy for the economy. I'm open to any and all ideas that will bring us into a healthier balance.

In short i want the best minds in offices of power who are willing to reach across the aisle and think more long term about the citizens of this country and not the connected few. This means completely removing the influence of money in our politics. As i've said before, nothing important gets done until you remove the influence of corrupting entities from the process.

Hillary has a long enough resume to show she has no problem sticking her nose in the money trough. She has been shown to flip flop on issues and do the politically expedient thing time and again. She is the polar opposite of what we need at this critical time. These are not Republican talking points. There is a well documented history here. And her resume is not that impressive other than holding titles of power. Big deal.
Click to expand...
This is extraordinarily close to how I feel about every issue.  Education and technology fueled by smart immigration, with the store thrown at it.  Things we will not get under any of the candates running.  

 
I can only imagine the reaction here, if Hillary had given this response instead of Sanders as an excuse for the states she has lost.

Alex Seitz-WaldVerified account ‏@aseitzwald 1h1 hour ago

When asked why he's losing in those states, Sanders responded, "Well, because poor people don't vote."
Click to expand...
http://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/bernie-sanders-poor-people-don-t-vote-s-just-fact-n561051

Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt, has built his campaign on a message of combating income inequality, but that message doesn't seem to be resonating in many of the states with the highest levels of income inequality in the country. In fact, of the 25 states with the highest levels of income inequality, 17 have held primaries so far, and Clinton has won 16 of those contests.

When asked why he thinks he's losing in those states, Sanders responded, "Well, because poor people don't vote. I mean, that's just a fact." [...]

Politifact has previously examined Sen. Sanders' claim that "75% of low-income workers chose not to vote" and characterized his comments as "a bit off."
Click to expand...
 
cobalt_27 said:
I assumed they were talking about the general, not the democratic primary.  I could be wrong.  FTR, I never thought she'd lose to Bernie.  I also never expected she'd lose as many states as she did.

Working in her favor are Trump's negatives.  Like I said, I hope those remain stable or worsen.  If so, she should be fine.  But, to watch her struggle in this round is a major red flag.  
Click to expand...
Something for you to be concerned about.

Within 2 months, from December to January, Donald Trump's net approval rating from from -18, to +33, a whopping 50% increase, unprecedented in the history of politics globally and in history. Trump Blockbuster 50% approval increase in two months!

Trump has quietly done something never seen before in history in the primaries, and I would not be surprised if he put that engineering into effect for the general election.

 
AAAll-Stars said:
Something for you to be concerned about.

Within 2 months, from December to January, Donald Trump's net approval rating from from -18, to +33, a whopping 50% increase, unprecedented in the history of politics globally and in history. Trump Blockbuster 50% approval increase in two months!

Trump has quietly done something never seen before in history in the primaries, and I would not be surprised if he put that engineering into effect for the general election.
Click to expand...
What data are you looking at?  Among which block of voters are you referencing?  Republicans?  I don't think that's accurate.

Anyway, the Atlantic article you posted is from January, and all I've seen is his numbers decline in recent months.

 
cobalt_27 said:
What data are you looking at?  Among which block of voters are you referencing?  Republicans?  I don't think that's accurate.

Anyway, the Atlantic article you posted is from January, and all I've seen is his numbers decline in recent months.
Click to expand...
Among Republican voters. Which was his target to win the primary.

As for his numbers decline in recent months, they've been generally the same since August 2015. 60% unfavorable vs. 40% unfavorable. And this was when his focus the entire time was on the Republican primary. Again, people can be set in their ways and vote their own way. Interestingly enough, Hillary started off at 52% favorable 47% unfavorable, and then has dropped to 51% unfavorable 48% favorable. Link. Something to be concerned about is that around April 6th, she has a whopping 58% unfavorable, 41% favorable, almost mirroring Trump's numbers. If this was a boxing match, the saying "she can be cut" is very much true.

 
AAAll-Stars said:
Among Republican voters. Which was his target to win the primary.

As for his numbers decline in recent months, they've been generally the same since August 2015. 60% unfavorable vs. 40% unfavorable. And this was when his focus the entire time was on the Republican primary. Again, people can be set in their ways and vote their own way. Interestingly enough, Hillary started off at 52% favorable 47% unfavorable, and then has dropped to 51% unfavorable 48% favorable. Link. Something to be concerned about is that around April 6th, she has a whopping 58% unfavorable, 41% favorable, almost mirroring Trump's numbers. If this was a boxing match, the saying "she can be cut" is very much true.
Click to expand...
Ok.  I just wanted to be clear on which data you were looking at.  Completely agree about Hillary.  She's a liability, and I think it's going to come and smack her supporters from out of nowhere...I don't think Tim or any of these guys grasps how bad she is.

Trump is the wild card.  He could save her from herself with his own lousy ratings.  But, I also fear he'll demolish her--and particularly her.

 
cobalt_27 said:
Ok.  I just wanted to be clear on which data you were looking at.  Completely agree about Hillary.  She's a liability, and I think it's going to come and smack her supporters from out of nowhere...I don't think Tim or any of these guys grasps how bad she is.

Trump is the wild card.  He could save her from herself with his own lousy ratings.  But, I also fear he'll demolish her--and particularly her.
Click to expand...
We're on the same page here. And I'll break down why Hillary and her supporters need to be afraid, very afraid.

Part I - Reframing of Core Issues.

Trump's three core issues 1. Political Corruption, 2. Trade, 3. Immigration and very quickly and easily be reframed to be pro-Democrat constituency issues. Illegal Immigration and Outsourcing disproportionally damage African-Americans, Hispanic-Americans, Unions, and The Poor. Also those groups suffer the most from political corruption. Trump can absolutely worm his way in here and start to split people off. He ain't winning these votes, but all he needs to do is chop off a little bit here, a little bit there, and a little bit there and it will add up quickly.

Part II - Women's Issues.

For Women, Trump is actually better on Women's issues than Hillary. Link. Link2.

Part III - Trump secretly takes popular positions.

Not surprising here. But I'll break it down.

Guns - 1/3rd of all Democrats have a gun in their household. 30% of all Democrats! If I was a Hillary supporter, I would be nervous about how relentless she is about going after guns. I would also be concerned about how pro-gun Trump has been. If Trump can go neutral on enough social issues, which he is, and then frame Hillary as a gun grabber, he can very much peel off a number of these people.

Ban the Muslims - A reprehensible position, but it's secretly more politically popular then you think. 45% of Democrats support a ban on non-US Muslims. It's terrible that Trump has said this, but he has also not brought it up since he first brought it up last summer. However if half the Democratic party is open to banning Muslims, then it means these people are ripe to be picked off by Trump.

Political Correctness - A whopping 79% of Americans view political correctness as a serious problem in America. Trump has planted a flag on a "war against political correctness" and while it seems like he's doing it to stay in the media and to rile up his base, the vast majority of Americans see political correctness not just as a problem, but a SERIOUS problem.

Raising taxes on wealthy - 82% of Americans think corporations don't pay enough taxes and 78% think the wealthy don't pay enough taxes. Trump has said he wants to raise taxes on the wealthy and he doesn't think hedge fund manages pay enough. His current tax plan though, is a Republican wet dream an unrealistic for any sort of balanced budget. However it does close a lot of loopholes. But what Trump defines is a "tax" remains to be seen, the same way the Obamacare tax penalty wasn't a "tax". He hasn't signed Grover Norquist's tax pledge. Trump's position on this has huge support, so stay tuned.

Universal Health Care - Trump has said adamantly, and during the Republican primary season no less, then when he's president that everyone would be covered by health care. 81% of Democrats favor the idea of Medicare-for-all and 55% of Americans support Medicare-for-all, which is Universal health Care. Again, more people ripe to be picked off by Trump when he starts wheeling out the specifics.

Social Security - Trump is going to protect it. Enough said.

I mean, there is more here but I can't state enough how bad of an idea it is to not take Trump seriously in this election. Trump has three great framing devices of having a rockstar business background, a "say it like it is" approach, and he's not paid off so he has a serious credibility leg up that Hillary doesn't have. He can engineer his campaign to move in ways that she can't, and their favorability numbers really aren't that far apart. If I was a Hillary supporter, I would take Trump very seriously. He supports issues that most of Americans actually want.

 
AAAll-Stars said:
We're on the same page here. And I'll break down why Hillary and her supporters need to be afraid, very afraid.

Part I - Reframing of Core Issues.

Trump's three core issues 1. Political Corruption, 2. Trade, 3. Immigration and very quickly and easily be reframed to be pro-Democrat constituency issues. Illegal Immigration and Outsourcing disproportionally damage African-Americans, Hispanic-Americans, Unions, and The Poor. Also those groups suffer the most from political corruption. Trump can absolutely worm his way in here and start to split people off. He ain't winning these votes, but all he needs to do is chop off a little bit here, a little bit there, and a little bit there and it will add up quickly.

Part II - Women's Issues.

For Women, Trump is actually better on Women's issues than Hillary. Link. Link2.

Part III - Trump secretly takes popular positions.

Not surprising here. But I'll break it down.

Guns - 1/3rd of all Democrats have a gun in their household. 30% of all Democrats! If I was a Hillary supporter, I would be nervous about how relentless she is about going after guns. I would also be concerned about how pro-gun Trump has been. If Trump can go neutral on enough social issues, which he is, and then frame Hillary as a gun grabber, he can very much peel off a number of these people.

Ban the Muslims - A reprehensible position, but it's secretly more politically popular then you think. 45% of Democrats support a ban on non-US Muslims. It's terrible that Trump has said this, but he has also not brought it up since he first brought it up last summer. However if half the Democratic party is open to banning Muslims, then it means these people are ripe to be picked off by Trump.

Political Correctness - A whopping 79% of Americans view political correctness as a serious problem in America. Trump has planted a flag on a "war against political correctness" and while it seems like he's doing it to stay in the media and to rile up his base, the vast majority of Americans see political correctness not just as a problem, but a SERIOUS problem.

Raising taxes on wealthy - 82% of Americans think corporations don't pay enough taxes and 78% think the wealthy don't pay enough taxes. Trump has said he wants to raise taxes on the wealthy and he doesn't think hedge fund manages pay enough. His current tax plan though, is a Republican wet dream an unrealistic for any sort of balanced budget. However it does close a lot of loopholes. But what Trump defines is a "tax" remains to be seen, the same way the Obamacare tax penalty wasn't a "tax". He hasn't signed Grover Norquist's tax pledge. Trump's position on this has huge support, so stay tuned.

Universal Health Care - Trump has said adamantly, and during the Republican primary season no less, then when he's president that everyone would be covered by health care. 81% of Democrats favor the idea of Medicare-for-all and 55% of Americans support Medicare-for-all, which is Universal health Care. Again, more people ripe to be picked off by Trump when he starts wheeling out the specifics.

Social Security - Trump is going to protect it. Enough said.

I mean, there is more here but I can't state enough how bad of an idea it is to not take Trump seriously in this election. Trump has three great framing devices of having a rockstar business background, a "say it like it is" approach, and he's not paid off so he has a serious credibility leg up that Hillary doesn't have. He can engineer his campaign to move in ways that she can't, and their favorability numbers really aren't that far apart. If I was a Hillary supporter, I would take Trump very seriously. He supports issues that most of Americans actually want.
Click to expand...
Personally, I don't get the sense Trump sits back and thinks about these issues a whole lot.  He's not a dummy, but he's not an intellectual, either.  He is, in the end, a salesman.  That's who he is and what he does.  More than anything else, I think you keyed in on the most important part of his appeal--he's the anti-political-correctness candidate.  All else flows from there.

Hillary is at her best when scripted, prepared, measured.  She is at her worst when confronted or things get spontaneous.  Seen this happen time and time again in interviews and debates.  She's easily flappable and looks cartoonish when she has to scramble around for an answer.  Trump is going to bring the worst out in her.  I felt good about Bernie against him because he isn't going to fall for Trump's ####.  But, Hillary is especially vulnerable to a Trump matchup.  They will yell at each other for several months, and Trump's just better at that--more of a natural--than she is.   That could turn people off to him, but if it successfully baits Hillary out of her comfort zone, all bets are off and Trump could become the next president.

All the handwringing about Bernie going *negative* is so laughable.  Bernie could have hit Hillary where it hurt numerous times and didn't.  He ran a clean, honest campaign against an opponent deserving of neither.  But, to read comments here, the faux outrage over this is hilarious, because just around the next corner is a guy who is going to crank it up.  And, I don't think Hillary has the stomach for it, I really don't.  It's not that I think she's weak; it's just that she's a deliberate, methodical thinker...one who is best served by time to measure her response(s) and is optimal when she can engage in higher level dialogue.  Trump, by contrast, is going to bring her down to the sewer and we're going to have to live with one of these #######s for the next 4 years.  

Blech.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hillary is at 50, with a +10 advantage, and Donald has 70% unfavorable including (not kidding) 87% with Hispanics.

Everybody knows who he is, he's never so much as run for dog catcher, the Brock oppo research is 40 years deep & it's all online already anyway, and his campaign team is delusional. Rhetorically Donald negates every one of Hillary's flaws, one for one.

Hillary will at times seem like she is trying to bungle this but she literally cannot.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
That piece is funny though - hey, look, I realize my friend hid her role in a bank failure, takes ginormous cash from another major national bank, tried to totally evade public record laws, secretly hired a true Obama hater against explicit orders as personal executive staff off the books, and has constantly contradicted herself and flip flopped like a trout on Wall Street and free trade, but she's totally honest, y'all.

It's a funny read.

 
Per the article, according to Politifact, Hillary is the most truthful of all the remaining candidates, slightly more than Sanders or Kasich, way more than Trump or Cruz. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
timschochet said:
Per the article, according to Politifact, Hillary is the most truthful of all the remaining candidates, slightly more than Sanders or Kasich, way more than Trump or Cruz. 
Click to expand...
That Politifact article has been covered here too. Look at the article and examine the issues they examined between Sanders and Hillary, two totally different classes of statements but treated equally.

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
Hillary is at 50, with a +10 advantage, and Donald has 70% unfavorable including (not kidding) 87% with Hispanics.

Everybody knows who he is, he's never so much as run for dog catcher, the Brock oppo research is 40 years deep & it's all online already anyway, and his campaign team is delusional. Rhetorically Donald negates every one of Hillary's flaws, one for one.

Hillary will at times seem like she is trying to bungle this but she literally cannot.
Click to expand...
While I would tend to agree I bet Hillary's camp would much rather face Cruz.  Against Cruz, this becomes a very standard election and she wins without a doubt.  I'm assuming she beats Trump as well but he is a bit of a wild card who had shown an ability in the primary to be a bit teflon.  Trump can take positions in the general that normal Republicans couldn't and could frame his populist message in a way that sounds appealing to Independents.  He can also do this while at the same time hammering Hillary constantly.  

I doubt it happens but to me there is a small chance Trump turns this election on its head while I think there is zero chance Cruz can win. While I shudder at the thought of Hillary or Donald as our next President, I am going to enjoy Trump constantly saying Crooked Hillary Clinton over the next 6 months.

 
timschochet said:
Rich Conway said:
The burden of proof is on you. 

Agreed. Here's all the information and articles for you to read.

That's not proof.

Did you read them?

No, why would I? The burden of proof is on you.
Click to expand...
If this is directed at me, I read everything Saints has posted. I simply don't agree with his conclusions. Or yours. 
Click to expand...
Of course this is directed at you.  So, have you recently read any independent analysis of the cattle futures issue, or the pardons issue, or even the fracking articles I've posted, or are your conclusions still based on the opinion pieces you read ages ago but only vaguely remember?  Tell you what, prove to me that you've actually read up on the pardons.  In your own words, who got pardoned, what were the accusations, and how were they false?  Ditto for cattle futures...

 
cobalt_27 said:
Direction is a steep trend down from last year around this time.  She was a net + before entering the Presidential race, according to Gallup.  Could that decline stabilize or even reverse?  Perhaps.  But, she needs to change something. And, fast, or else we get Trump for President.
Click to expand...
Nothing has to change....the bar in this country keeps sinking and sinking.  The two parties are fine with where things are.  All they have to produce is someone "not as bad as the other guy" or "just good enough" and the electorate is fine with it.  It sucks, but is what it is.  It's going to take the lowering of the bar to Trump/Cruz levels for her to win, but that's what's going to happen.

 
cobalt_27 said:
squistion said:
How many of those states were caucuses? And I got news for you, they don't award equal delegates for the number of states each candidate has won, the number of delegates instead is proportional to the population of that state (strange but true fun fact).
Click to expand...
You're missing the point.  Under no circumstances should she have lost a single caucus or primary.  Not against Bernie.
Click to expand...
Well...not if the Democratic party was/is as strong as it's defenders claim or if Hillary was/is as liberal as they claim.  It will be interesting to see the "liberals" here trying to navigate the mental gymnastics when nothing of consequence is done regarding Wall Street and she continues to be the GOP like hawk on foreign policy.

ETA:  I mean look at all the reframing that's already beginning in this very thread.  It's pretty comical.  Is "it's all Rove's fault" going to be the new "It was all Bush's fault"?  Seriously :lol:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Commish said:
Nothing has to change....the bar in this country keeps sinking and sinking.  The two parties are fine with where things are.  All they have to produce is someone "not as bad as the other guy" or "just good enough" and the electorate is fine with it.  It sucks, but is what it is.  It's going to take the lowering of the bar to Trump/Cruz levels for her to win, but that's what's going to happen.
Click to expand...
I'm sick of people blaming the Parties - the saying 'we get the government we deserve is absolutely correct'.

How many of you knew who Bernie was a year ago? I sure didn't - and that's the problem. If we want things to change it means we need to be pro-active in supporting the candidates we want instead of letting the Party machine push their favorite candidate through.

Now that I look back it's truly incredible that Obama was able to defeat Hillary in 2008.  Unfortunately, someone with the total package like him is unlikely to come around again soon.

 
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
261K
rockaction
rockaction
HellToupee
***Official*** Joe Biden 2016 Presidential Thread
Replies
35
Views
2K
That one guy
T

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
Back
Top