Official Hillary Clinton 2016 thread (1 Viewer)

[TobiasFunke]

 

Here's what I wrote before. I just don't get your anti-press ranting at all. How do you think you get any information about the candidates?  Where do you think all the information about both Clinton and Trump that makes them so distasteful to you comes from? 

 

[Poppa]

Is it a fact?

Yes and no, IMO. It's a fact, but not necessarily the way you construct it. I have a feeling what happened is something like this:

HUMA The State Department needs copies of all your work emails for the FOIA.

HILLARY Don't they already have copies?

HUMA They didn't keep them. Or they can't find them. I dunno, it's all screwed up.

HILLARY Well, I don't want to give them my personal emails. Can't we separate those?

HUMA Yeah, it's gonna take a lot of time to go through it though. We'll have to pay somebody.

HILLARY You're right. I wish I had thought of that before. What a mess. Oh well, let's do it.

HUMA What do you want me do with the private ones once you've separated them?

HILLARY I dunno. Get rid of them I suppose. I don't need them anymore. 

Veritable Inspector Clouseau here...

 

[Zegras11]

They've had a long history of sliminess. 

 It's so funny when you write something like this.

 

[dparker713]

Of course they knew the rules.  Again, any wise leader knows the rules which is my assertion.  If those aren't up to snuff for you, how about Pope Francis?  Winston Churchill? Abe Lincoln?  These are all people who are/were extremely effective because they took the time and learned the current environments they were/are working in.  We can flip this around and ask you for a list of effective leaders who just went and did their own thing without understand the current environments/rules they were working under I guess.

 Great leaders take time to understand the rules they are bound to so they can be as effective/efficient as possible under the law.

That's the quote I took issue with.  Not that great leaders are oblivious to their surroundings.  It's that they're rarely constrained by rules or forge ahead making new rules. 

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Is it a fact?

Yes and no, IMO. It's a fact, but not necessarily the way you construct it. I have a feeling what happened is something like this:

HUMA The State Department needs copies of all your work emails for the FOIA.

HILLARY Don't they already have copies?

HUMA They didn't keep them. Or they can't find them. I dunno, it's all screwed up.

....

Ok, you missed some of the fact. The fact is all of the electronic versions of the emails are gone. Work and personal. That is not in dispute, by anyone.

Why print them?

And why get rid of the electronic versions of work and personal?

 

[The Commish]

Here's what I wrote before. I just don't get your anti-press ranting at all. How do you think you get any information about the candidates?  Where do you think all the information about both Clinton and Trump that makes them so distasteful to you comes from? 

I responded with the following:

I know there are good sources for news, all of which seem to be outside the United States.  If you have some approved consistent sources we should know about that fit what you describe as "investigative reporters, campaign beat reporters and the like" I'd like the list.  It has to be far easier to list those people than the 24 hour news yahoos.

Then you said "no it isn't"....I am assuming you were talking about the ease of listing the "good sources" in the press?  I'm lost.

Either way, I used press and mean our "news media" if those two terms aren't synonyms, read it as "news media" where I said press  

 

[dparker713]

Ok, you missed some of the fact. The fact is all of the electronic versions of the emails are gone. Work and personal. That is not in dispute, by anyone.

Why print them?

And why get rid of the electronic versions of work and personal?

Data storage is neither free nor unlimited?

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Data storage is neither free nor unlimited?

The paper was turned into electronic anyway, it had to be printed, boxed, delivered, scanned, turned into images, then reviewed. Printing added tons of time - and data space and money - to all that.

 

[dparker713]

For all those people unwilling to vote against Trump, please just spend some time in those threads.  If you still don't think this is a fight worth fighting then I've got no words for you.

 

[The Commish]

That's the quote I took issue with.  Not that great leaders are oblivious to their surroundings.  It's that they're rarely constrained by rules or forge ahead making new rules. 

We are all constrained by rules.  Those constraints have to be understood and abided by until they can be altered, broken whatever.  I never said they were ok with being constrained by rules and just live in that sandbox by accepting them and never attempting to change them.  Two completely different things.

 

[TobiasFunke]

I responded with the following:

Then you said "no it isn't"....I am assuming you were talking about the ease of listing the "good sources" in the press?  I'm lost.

Either way, I used press and mean our "news media" if those two terms aren't synonyms, read it as "news media" where I said press  

Correct.  When I said "no it isn't" I was saying that it's easier to list the untrustworthy ones than the trustworthy ones.

By "news media" do you include the people on the campaign trail that Trump vilifies?  The ones he pens up and then takes away their credentials if he doesn't like their reporting?  Those people are doing an incredibly important job, and if you condone how Trump treats them (which you seemed to be doing here) I think you're making a huge mistake, to borrow a phrase from my alias' brother-in-law.  If you give our politicians a pass on vilifying or ignoring campaign beat reporters and investigative reporters you're effectively saying you don't care about facts or the truth or anything other than the packaged image the campaign itself wants to sell to you.  Might as well cancel the debates and the entire campaigns in that case- let each candidate air a 30 minute ad about how they have a foolproof plan to bring about world peace, cure cancer and make you rich rich rich! in the process and then we can cast our votes immediately afterwards for our favorite.
 

 

[Jayrod]

Veritable Inspector Clouseau here...

Every now and then I feel like we are the victims of a massive, slow play fishing trip by timmah.

Bravo, sir....bravo.

 

[Sinn Fein]

Is it a fact?

Yes and no, IMO. It's a fact, but not necessarily the way you construct it. I have a feeling what happened is something like this:

HUMA The State Department needs copies of all your work emails for the FOIA.

HILLARY Don't they already have copies?

HUMA They didn't keep them. Or they can't find them. I dunno, it's all screwed up.

HILLARY Well, I don't want to give them my personal emails. Can't we separate those?

HUMA Yeah, it's gonna take a lot of time to go through it though. We'll have to pay somebody.

HILLARY You're right. I wish I had thought of that before. What a mess. Oh well, let's do it.

HUMA What do you want me do with the private ones once you've separated them?

HILLARY I dunno. Get rid of them I suppose. I don't need them anymore. 

 

[Sinn Fein]

 

[The Commish]

Correct.  When I said "no it isn't" I was saying that it's easier to list the untrustworthy ones than the trustworthy ones.

By "news media" do you include the people on the campaign trail that Trump vilifies?  The ones he pens up and then takes away their credentials if he doesn't like their reporting?  Those people are doing an incredibly important job, and if you condone how Trump treats them (which you seemed to be doing here) I think you're making a huge mistake, to borrow a phrase from my alias' brother-in-law.  If you give our politicians a pass on vilifying or ignoring campaign beat reporters and investigative reporters you're effectively saying you don't care about facts or the truth or anything other than the packaged image the campaign itself wants to sell to you.  Might as well cancel the debates and the entire campaigns in that case- let each candidate air a 30 minute ad about how they have a foolproof plan to bring about world peace, cure cancer and make you rich rich rich! in the process and then we can cast our votes immediately afterwards for our favorite.
 

What means the bold?  He puts them in a holding cell?  No...that seems like it'd be against the law.  If he wants to prevent certain people from his events, that's his prerogative I guess.  That's his right and the aftermath will be in the court of public opinion which won't end well.  So I wouldn't say I condone it.  I don't think we owe the media anything either.  We have so many outlets now, the information will always get out.

 

[Sinn Fein]

Is it a fact?

Yes and no, IMO. It's a fact, but not necessarily the way you construct it. I have a feeling what happened is something like this:

HUMA: The State Department needs copies of all your work emails for the FOIA.

HILLARY: #### that ####.  I am a private citizen, I am not subject to FOIA requests.

HUMA: State Department is claiming your emails were government records.

HILLARY: The hell they were.  They were on my own private server.  Anything I wanted to share I sent to someone with a state.gov email, or whatever you call that kind of communication.

HUMA:  Yeah, it turns out, the State Department can't search for emails that way. 

HILLARY:  Can we tell them we don't have any emails?  I never told anyone about my private server, so they probably don't know about it.

HUMA: No.  They know about the server.

HILLARY:  Wait...wat...how?

HUMA:  Sid sent them some emails he sent to your address.  Cheryl had tried to play dumb up to that point, but now they seem serious.

HILLARY:  Sid ####### Blumenthal, that little rat.

HUMA:  Yeah, he already called to apologize, he thought you had already disclosed those emails.  He promised that he kept the other emails, about you know what secret.

HILLARY:  Well, do they know about your email?  Cheryl's?  the others?

HUMA:  Yes, Yes, and Yes.

HILLARY:  Mother####er

HUMA:  So how should we respond?  We can send over a flash drive with the emails.  That is probably the easiest.

HILLARY:  I should rip your tongue out....wait, nevermind, no need to get drastic here

HUMA:  Sorry.

HILLARY:  Well, we have to get rid of the bad stuff first.  I want you to call up Cheryl and Heather, and get them to delete everything that has to do with Bill, the foundation, Chelsea, and that freeloading husband of hers - you and all that extra cash, anything to do with setting up speeches while still in office, foreign donations, and anything where I called Obama a butt face - and for gods sake make sure we get rid of any classified documents.

HILLARY:  And, when I say delete, I mean delete everything. E-VER-Y-THING.  I want that email server wiped clean.  Use a cloth if you have to.

HUMA:  I'll get right on it.  Should we put what is left on a flash drive?

HILLARY:  No.  Print those ####ers out, so its impossible to manage.  If those bastards are going to make my life difficult now - right back at 'em.

 

[avoiding injuries]

I just read she hasn't had a press conference during the entire primary season. That can't be true

 

[Loan Sharks]

Huma Weiner. 

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

See, at some point we have to hold ourselves accountable for what we can control

A lifetime of exclusively casting protests votes is "washing your hands" of the mess, not being accountable.

 

[The Commish]

See, at some point we have to hold ourselves accountable for what we can control

A lifetime of exclusively casting protests votes is "washing your hands" of the mess, not being accountable.

I agree.  Fortunately, I have never cast a protest vote.  I've always voted FOR someone/thing

 

[MaxThreshold]

Good morning. 

I've read all the criticism over the last few pages and I regard it, frankly, as unjust. Jon claims I'm willfully ignorant of facts. This despite that last night I posted a Politicfact judgment which contradicted some of my earlier claims and made my candidate look bad. Cobalt claims I am not interested in sharing ideas unless they are my ideas. I think there's enough evidence to prove that this is not so. In terms of this thread I have responded to nearly every criticism and attack against Hillary. Why would I do that if I wasn't interested in exchanging ideas? Am I only exchanging ideas in his eyes if I come I accept his negative view about Hillary Clinton? Surely there are enough people in this thread attacking Hillary- is it necessary for me to join them? 

Anonymousbob thinks Im insulting everyone with whom I've disagreed over the email story by stating that I found the legal details confusing and boring. How then, he demands, can I claim to have a strong opinion? By writing this he obviously hasn't read me, because I have NEVER offered a strong opinion about whether or not Hillary violated the rules or the law. My strong opinion was over whether it mattered one way or the other, particularly in terms of her qualifications for the Presidency. My belief is that it does not. As regards the question of whether rules or laws were broken, I have been VERY consistent all along: I was skeptical, but unsure, confused by the conflicting arguments, hopeful that it would go away, confident there would be no indictment, and bored by the whole thing. I've stated all of this openly and never hidden any of it. I don't think I've insulted anyone. 

I will continue to fight for Hillary Clinton in this thread. There's me and squistion, sometimes TGunz. DParker, Tobias, BFS, and CTSU will defend Hillary from time to time but she's not their first choice. Everybody else who comtributes to this thread is strongly opposed to Hillary Clinton. So yeah we are surrounded. I kinda like that. I feel I'm fighting the good fight here. And she's gonna win. 

Look it that...it's the Cleveland Browns of the FFA political threads.

 

[cstu]

Ok, you missed some of the fact. The fact is all of the electronic versions of the emails are gone. Work and personal. That is not in dispute, by anyone.

Why print them?

And why get rid of the electronic versions of work and personal?

So wait, she didn't wipe the server? 

 

[MaxThreshold]

His complete disdain for accountability to the press- and by extension the people- doesn't bother you at all?

IMO people focusing only on what Trump would do in office are missing an important point.  If he wins it validates the notion that our politicians can completely disregard any notion that they have to be truthful and accountable. I know everyone says that every politician lies and evades (Clinton included of course), but Trump is orders of magnitude worse on this front than anyone we've ever seen, Clinton included.  At least most others feel the need to respond when they're accused of lying- Trump vilifies the accuser. If the American people don't hold him accountable for that, why would any other politician in the future feel the need to act differently?

You guys talk about maybe losing this election battle but eventually winning the war, but when it comes to the push for integrity and accountability so popular among Sanders supporters, a Trump general election victory ends the war.  We'll have a new army of post-Trump, post-truth, post-accountability politicians.

OMG ARE YOU FOOKING KIDDING ME?  THIS IS WHAT YOU SAY ABOUT TRUMP BUT NOT CLINTON?  THAT'S TEXT-BOOK HRC.

Everything you say about Trump can be equally applied to Clinton.  However, I won't vote out of fear like you and the rest of your buddies are trying to push on every one.  On a side note, this "fear card" stuff is funny because just a few short years ago you were accusing the GOP of doing the exact same thing.  Weird, huh?

In the end, you know nothing of how good or bad a Trump Presidency would be and, IMO, it won't be any better or worse than a Clinton Presidency.  You simply have no proof.  Both candidates stink equally.

 

[MaxThreshold]

I'm comparing the two on ethics and accountability simply because that seems to be the one thing that Sanders voters and other "none of the above" folks in this thread seem to be hanging their hat on, not because I think it's the biggest and most important difference between Trump and Clinton.  I'm aware of Clinton's shortcomings in this area- my argument is merely that Trump's are bigger and more dangerous.  To simplify it- even if they did lie with the same frequency (they don't), at least Clinton seems to feel she has some basic obligation to defend or apologize for anything she says that isn't accurate. Trump in contrast simply tells the press- and by extension all of us- to go #### ourselves.

And you're failing quite spectacularly at it.  You haven't proved anything of the sort.

 

[MaxThreshold]

Clinton's massive ethics problems are getting paid a lot for speeches, fundraising the way presidential candidates fundraise, and setting up her work email because the State Department's setup was a cluster####.

Your post demonstrates a clear ignorance of the facts and the details surrounding this whole issue.  Of course, as a Hillary supporter, no one is surprised at this.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

So wait, she didn't wipe the server? 

They deleted the electronic version of everything, official and personal.

Hillary at her UN press conference said she would not turn over the server because it had the yoga, and personal stuff, but also communications with Bill, whatever that means because he claims he has never emailed but twice in his life.

Then Hillary's attorney Kendall told Congress and State that they had deleted everything and there was nothing recoverable, so hey there's no point to asking for independent inspection of the server. And they wouldn't be turning the server over to anyone, not the IG, not the po-po, not anyone anyway. People took that to mean the server had been "wiped." Hillary would neither confirm nor deny.

Then later the feds seized the server. Then Hillary/Kendall said well they didn't really 'wipe' they just deleted everything.

 

[Loan Sharks]

So wait, she didn't wipe the server? 

She did, with a cloth. 

 

[squistion]

Not that general election polls really mean anything, of course...

Capital JournalVerified account ‏@WSJPolitics 1h1 hour ago

New WSJ/NBC/Marist poll shows Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders both winning against Donald Trump in November.

 

[Parrothead]

fittingly enough while reading this thread and all of the Hillary supporters, Pretzel Logic by Steely Dan just came on my Pandora..

 

[Sinn Fein]

Not that general election polls really mean anything, of course...

Capital JournalVerified account ‏@WSJPolitics 1h1 hour ago

New WSJ/NBC/Marist poll shows Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders both winning against Donald Trump in November.

it was a California only poll

Clinton 55-31

Sanders 62-28

Sanders is once again the better general election candidate.

 

[squistion]

it was a California only poll

Clinton 55-31

Sanders 62-28

Sanders is once again the better general election candidate.

Who hasn't yet been vetted by the national media or subjected to the 24/7 attacks and scrutiny Hillary has.

 

[Parrothead]

Who hasn't yet been vetted by the national media or subjected to the 24/7 attacks and scrutiny Hillary has.

mostly because he's not a slimy phony with a history of lying

 

[dparker713]

it was a California only poll

Clinton 55-31

Sanders 62-28

Sanders is once again the better general election candidate.

Really hard to win when you're not on the ballot.

 

[Sinn Fein]

Who hasn't yet been vetted by the national media or subjected to the 24/7 attacks and scrutiny Hillary has.

Just spitballing here, but maybe thats because he is not nearly as shady a character as Clinton...

 

[MaxThreshold]

Who hasn't yet been vetted by the national media or subjected to the 24/7 attacks and scrutiny Hillary has.

Oh please.  This is just nonsense.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

Then so far, you have to admit it is failing. It isn't bending the rate of increase in costs down.

Yes it most certainly has.  Whether sustainable or not is a question, but the rate of increase in healthcare cost are down both with respect to what they were and with respect to what they were predicted to be.   Some of this no doubt has nothing to do with the ACA, but it is beyond the point to argue that none of it has anything to do with the ACA unless you also want to argue that non of the items most griped about (limited networks, higher out of pocket costs) have nothing to do with the ACA.

 

[Willie Neslon]

Artificial "Hive Mind" taking political questions on reddit today.  Interesting results.

https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/4m24zv/i_am_an_artificial_hive_mind_called_unu_i/

What are the odds of campaign finance reform during a Clinton presidency (or any upcoming presidency for that matter)?








[–]UNU_AMA[S] 1751 points 4 hours ago 



UNU SAYS: 0% CHANCE

COMMENTARY: UNU has strong conviction on this point, expressing little faith that real campaign finance reform will occur.

Hi UNU! Do you trust Hillary Clinton?








[–]UNU_AMA[S] 1126 points 4 hours ago 



UNU SAYS: "NO"

COMMENTARY: The Hive Mind had surprisingly strong conviction on this point, with 95% certainty.

Ideologically speaking does Bernie Sanders have more in common with Jill Stein or Hillary Clinton?








[–]UNU_AMA[S] 230 points 3 hours ago 



UNU SAYS: Jill Stein

If elected will Hillary Clinton continue to oppose the TPP?

[–]UNU_AMA[S] 396 points 4 hours ago 








UNU SAYS: I doubt it

Who will Donald Trump pick for Vice President?

[–]UNU_AMA[S] 773 points 5 hours ago 








UNU SAYS: "Chris Christie"

COMMENTARY: UNU has high conviction at the present time, although it's still very early to make such a pick

Has election fraud taken place during the 2016 Democratic National Committee (DNC) primary race?








[–]UNU_AMA[S] 737 points 5 hours ago 



UNU SAYS: "I Believe"

COMMENTARY: UNU feels mildly confident that Election Fraud has taken place. This is not high confidence, but it's still an interesting result.

In the unlikely event of a three person race between Trump, Clinton, and Sanders who would win?

[–]UNU_AMA[S] 743 points 4 hours ago 








UNU says: "SANDERS" 81%

Comment: UNU was quite confident in this result, achieving 100% brainpower which indicates a decisive answer.

Will Democrats take control of the house and senate?

[–]UNU_AMA[S] 273 points 4 hours ago 








UNU SAYS: "YES"

 

[Willie Neslon]

Hi UNU. I realize that according to you Bernie Sanders doesn't have a chance at the presidency. My question is, do you think that we would see a significant reform in U.S. Politics if he were, or would he be unable to pass most of his proposals due to congress vetoing?

[–]UNU_AMA[S] 545 points 4 hours ago 








UNU SAYS: " YES, WE WOULD SEE A SIGNIFICANT REFORM IN US POLITICS."

COMMENTARY: UNU had high conviction (80%) on this answer.

IF Bernie wins the nomination, how would he do against Trump?

[–]UNU_AMA[S] 1045 points 5 hours ago 








UNU SAYS: "WIN'S BIG"

COMMENTARY: UNU expressed strong conviction that Bernie Sanders would win big against TRUMP

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

Shame on the Democrats for putting us in this position then.

Yep, it is those    democrats that  nominated Trump.  At least according to the "personal responsibility" party members.

 

[squistion]

Oh please.  This is just nonsense.

Nonsense that the GOP hasn't wasted their time and money on a candidate who will be off the national stage after the Democratic convention? Even Reince Priebus isn't that dumb. Trump has already called him a Socialist/Communist at least a half dozen times and that would be the non-stop 24/7 meme if Sanders were the nominee. Sanders has been treated with kid gloves because he realistically never stood a chance against Hillary.

 

[Willie Neslon]

Would the democrats be better off with Bernie or Hillary to defeat Trump?

[–]UNU_AMA[S] 383 points 5 hours ago 







UNU SAYS: "BERNIE"

COMMENTARY: UNU had 99% conviction in this answer.

Will Hillary Clinton be indicted?

[–]UNU_AMA[S] 650 points 6 hours ago 







UNU SAYS: "I doubt it'

COMMENTARY: UNU expressed mild confidence in this answer, but not absolute certainty.

Does Hillary Clinton support the voter or Corporations more?

[–]UNU_AMA[S] 944 points 5 hours ago 








UNU SAYS: "Corporations"

COMMENTARY: UNU expressed high conviction on this point.

 

[timschochet]

Nonsense that the GOP hasn't wasted their time and money on a candidate who will be off the national stage after the Democratic convention? Even Reince Priebus isn't that dumb. Trump has already called him a Socialist/Communist at least a half dozen times and that would be the non-stop 24/7 meme if Sanders were the nominee. Sanders has been treated with kid gloves because he realistically never stood a chance against Hillary.

Stop it squis! Hillary is going to get crushed by Trump, Bernie would have beaten him easily, Commish and Sinn Fein are writing in Mickey Mouse and all of this is YOUR FAULT! 

 

[Sinn Fein]

Finally making headway here.

 

[tone1oc]

It's not surprising at all that the "swarm" of data from people supports extremely populous ideas, which Bernie has platformed.  Wake me when IBM Watson votes for Bernie.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

My hope is that a Trump presidency results in gridlock and formation of a viable third party. That we have sunk to Trump being the catalyst for that is an indictment on how bad our political process has become.

Weren't you a GOP insider?  

 

[squistion]

Stop it squis! Hillary is going to get crushed by Trump, Bernie would have beaten him easily, Commish and Sinn Fein are writing in Mickey Mouse and all of this is YOUR FAULT! 

It is really funny, Timmy, to see all the Sanders supporters now hanging out here instead of the Bernie thread. Poor little fellas got no place else to go I guess, now that Hillary is less than a week away from clinching the nomination.

 

[timschochet]

It is really funny, Timmy, to see all the Sanders supporters now hanging out here instead of the Bernie thread. Poor little fellas got no place else to go I guess, now that Hillary is less than a week away from clinching the nomination.

Don't you DARE use the word clinch! Between now and the convention a meteor might fall on Hillary's head. 

 

[Guest]

It is really funny, Timmy, to see all the Sanders supporters now hanging out here instead of the Bernie thread. Poor little fellas got no place else to go I guess, now that Hillary is less than a week away from clinching the nomination.

Oh just wait for the party and parade when Hillary is disgraced.  

 

[Loan Sharks]

State department admits to deleting footage. 

I am not in the least bit shocked that the State department is corrupt.

Oh yeah we deleted that.

 

[Loan Sharks]

Don't you DARE use the word clinch! Between now and the convention a meteor might fall on Hillary's head. 

Or she might be indicted.