Official Hillary Clinton 2016 thread (1 Viewer)

[Parrothead]

I wonder if alot of people are saying no?   who would want to be associated with that corrupt crew..  the VP selection better have a trusted lawyer on speed dial!

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

I wonder if alot of people are saying no?   who would want to be associated with that corrupt crew..  the VP selection better have a trusted lawyer on speed dial!

Possible. Trump also had the same problem, but the Clintons also have the problem of not trusting anyone with any serious credibility or big profile near them and inside their WH either.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Charlie Crist is in the VP Running? You mean the guy who lost to Rick Scott? Are you kidding me?

Even I am hoping she isn't this bad.

 

[TobiasFunke]

 

Great, the Canadians are trolling us now.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

 

Lee Fang Verified account ‏@lhfang


Totally possible Hillary gets a prominent Republican to leave party, join her as veep. Grand neocon-pro-biz ticket.

Clinton launches ‘Republicans Against Trump’ campaign




- Let's play a game - which party has the biggest suckers?

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Great, the Canadians are trolling us now.

Well they have been for 150 years....

 

[TobiasFunke]

Well they have been for 150 years....

NBC already made them walk this one back, at least.  USA!  USA!

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

NBC already made them walk this one back, at least.  USA!  USA!

Yeah, that's good, I love the idea of them dropping untruth bombs into the middle of our elections. Seriously, phew, no way.

 

[pantagrapher]

Hispanic Chamber of Commerce Endorses Hillary Clinton At The RNC

The Hispanic Chamber of Commerce made an endorsement Wednesday at the Republican National Convention, but it wasn't for any candidate attending the event. 

The group's president and CEO, Javier Palomarez, announced it would be endorsing Hillary Clinton in the general election in an interview with CNN.

 

[cobalt_27]

cobalt_27, when  you're not commenting about me, you're a guy I very much respect here. You're thoughtful, you're not partisan, you offer interesting perspective on the election and even though I disagree with some of it I'm always interested to read it. Obviously I got off on the wrong foot with you, and stayed there, and that was not my intent. If I have personally offended you in something that I have written, then I apologize. This election is going to get even more intense, and I would value having an ongoing discussion with you about it, rather than tossing insults back and forth (that goes for almost everyone here, as well.) 

I appreciate it.   

We probably agree on a lot (in fact, I know we do).  And, we'll continue to disagree on stuff as well.  But, I am cool to hit a reset button if you are, and I'll dial down the tool factor and try to focus more on content.

 

[cobalt_27]

So something is wrong with this picture.

We know that African-Americans, women, Mexican-Americans, all favor Hillary by pretty large margins. Therefore the percentage of white men who support Donald Trump must be staggering. 

I read somewhere (538 perhaps) that at the current rate of women supporting Trump, he'd need 88% of the male vote.  Something isn't right with the poll modeling in this new Trump world.  None of the numbers make any sense.

 

[IC FBGCav]

I know many women that will not vote Hillary. 

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Charlie Crist would be a great VP pick for Hillary.  He makes her look principled and not-at-all reptilian by comparison.

 

[Sammy3469]

I read somewhere (538 perhaps) that at the current rate of women supporting Trump, he'd need 88% of the male vote.  Something isn't right with the poll modeling in this new Trump world.  None of the numbers make any sense.

A lot of the polls have large MOE for minorities in comparison to white MOE.  Take the Monmouth poll the MOEs are 3.9 v 7.8.  If the minority breakdown is really 14/10/5% like in 2012 and AAs go for her 90/10%, Hispanics 70/30%, and Others are 50/50% then her total minority support should be 70-75%.  Well Monmouth has her at 61%.  If 40-50% of your support is getting undersampled to that degree, it affects the numbers.  Her 3 point lead in that poll goes to 5-6 point lead (assuming similar corrections in the white numbers), if you believe those are the correct ratios.

The basic point is that one or two people from a 157 person sample haves a disproportionate effect on the overall topline numbers (conversely if you get the perfect sample where everyone of the 157 would say either Clinton or Trump would lead to outsized numbers for her).  

 

[squistion]

Brian Hiatt ‏@hiattb Jul 19

If Michelle Obama begins her speech next week with "Ever since my childhood in Slovenia..." it would be the greatest thing ever

 

[TobiasFunke]

Brian Hiatt ‏@hiattb Jul 19

If Michelle Obama begins her speech next week with "Ever since my childhood in Slovenia..." it would be the greatest thing ever

I like it. 

I was thinking something along the lines of "I'm sure Heidi Cruz is ready to take notes for 2020, so let's get started ... " as an opener, but this might be better.  Less subtle.

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

I have a feeling there are a LOT of Dem speeches getting rewritten now.

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

I have a feeling there are a LOT of Dem speeches getting rewritten now.

I agree they can all elude to the dumpster fire freely burning left in Cleveland this week.  That convention just gave them so much ammo,it might be the death cry for the party.

 

[Poppa]

 



Clinton launches ‘Republicans Against Trump’ campaign




- Let's play a game - which party has the biggest suckers?

Rodents rejoice. Clinton launches RAT campaign...

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

I like it. 

I was thinking something along the lines of "I'm sure Heidi Cruz is ready to take notes for 2020, so let's get started ... " as an opener, but this might be better.  Less subtle.

It would go down as the greatest first line ever at a convention.

 

[The Commish]

Why no. James Comey gets to decide, and Loretta Lynch. And they decided that Hillary did nothing wrong. 

No no.....they decided she did nothing that has been prosecuted in the past....very different.  They never ever said she did nothing wrong.  Squis must have missed this post.  I'm sure he'd have corrected such a gross misrepresentation of 'the facts'...is he on a TO ??

 

[The Commish]

It's a huge fishing trip at this point.  If you read this, remembering this comment comes from the same person that believes Trump is going to be dictator of the USA, you have to just shake your head and move on.  He's unhinged and doesn't take anything to a place of "logic"...it's a vast array of randomly drawn lines to fit a narrative he's created.  There's no logical consistency anywhere to be found.

I believe that Trump if elected is a threat to the Constitution and will would seek if he could to become a dictator. I did not say he would succeed and I am hardly the only person to believe this. But it isn't a fishing trip. You have continuously discounted the existential threat that Trump represents. Hopefully I'll never have to say "I told you so." 

Because I understand what Trump can do within reason and choose not to join you in your perpetual state of panic and fear doesn't mean I am discounting anything.  If you think that's what I am doing, it says more about where you're at in your position than anything.

 

[dparker713]

I couldn't disagree with this more.  Information is classified for a reason.  If it weren't sensitive to national security, it would not be classified as such.  Those classification rules do not "govern so much of our lives."  They have nothing to do with "us".  They govern those individuals, lower level government employees all the way up to the top, who are entrusted to view/handle/process information sensitive enough to warrant the appropriate classification.  

We've already discussed this and I know you don't think it is a deal (big or small) at all and you think she is above the "pettiness" as you call it.  She is not above this.  No one is.  

Bull####.

 

[dparker713]

As SOS, one of the highest level employees, she sees highly classified info that many lower level employees never see and you think she shouldn't have to follow security rules regarding that highly classified and sensitive info? You will believe whatever you can to justify your support of her. It doesn't make you look good. 

Well, she generally did handle that information properly.  She obviously used the proper channels nearly all the time.   

 

[BeaverCleaver]

Well, she generally did handle that information properly.  She obviously used the proper channels nearly all the time.   

Not according to the head of the FBI.

 

[PlasmaDogPlasma]

I don't necessarily agree or disagree.  I just thought Fournier made an intuitively reasonable case for why this election--and approach/tone of the conventions--likely will be different than in years past.  

AKA worse than ever

 

[PlasmaDogPlasma]

After playing around with the NYTimes paths to victory thing they put out today, I will be absolutely shocked if she doesn't pick Tim Kaine as the VP.  

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/upshot/presidential-polls-forecast.html?emc=edit_ta_20160719&nlid=53512865&ref=headline&_r=0&utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=New Campaign&utm_term=*Editors Picks

Hopefully she doesn't

 

[dparker713]

Not according to the head of the FBI.

She was SoS for years.  You think she only handled classified information 110 times?  Yes, obviously she used the proper channels for classified information the vast majority of the time.

 

[BeaverCleaver]

She was SoS for years.  You think she only handled classified information 110 times?  Yes, obviously she used the proper channels for classified information the vast majority of the time.

 I suggest you go read what he had to say about this. 

 

[dparker713]

 I suggest you go read what he had to say about this. 

He'd have nothing to say about this.  There would have been no reason to give him access to the classified information that she properly sent.

 

[BeaverCleaver]

He'd have nothing to say about this.  There would have been no reason to give him access to the classified information that she properly sent.

Coney had plenty to say...keep ignoring it. 

 

[dparker713]

Coney had plenty to say...keep ignoring it. 

Please post exactly what you think he claimed about the classified correspondence conducted on secured networks by Hillary Clinton.

 

[BeaverCleaver]

Please post exactly what you think he claimed about the classified correspondence conducted on secured networks by Hillary Clinton.

Go back and read what you wrote and how you are trying to deflect. It's comical.

 

[BeaverCleaver]

Well, she generally did handle that information properly.  She obviously used the proper channels nearly all the time.   

Generally and nearly are the key words here.

 

[Jayrok]

Bull####.

 

[BeaverCleaver]

 

[dparker713]

Generally and nearly are the key words here.

Yes they are.  The fact that you glossed over my words to fit your own narrative is exactly the problem with your posts.  

 

[dparker713]

Are you actually of the opinion that the US classifies the right amount of information?  That we're not grossly over classifying information?  That because the government says it should be classified, it actually should be classified?

 

[BeaverCleaver]

Yes they are.  The fact that you glossed over my words to fit your own narrative is exactly the problem with your posts.  

Not even generally or nearly close.

 

[dparker713]

Go back and read what you wrote and how you are trying to deflect. It's comical.

My posts are directly on point with what I wrote earlier.  I'm not the one avoiding posting the evidence I claim I have.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Please post exactly what you think he claimed about the classified correspondence conducted on secured networks by Hillary Clinton.

This is what Comey said about what Hillary did on insecure networks:

1) Clinton did send and receive emails that were classified at the time;

2) Hillary's email server was negligently insecure;

3) Hillary did not archive work emails as she was required to do;

4) Hillary and her attorneys did delete emails they were required to turn over;

5) Some of the people Hillary was in regular contact with were hacked/eavesdropped by nation states;

6) Hillary herself was almost certainly hacked/eavesdropped;

7) Hillary sent classified emails unencrypted from within hostile countries; and

8) Hillary sent TS/SCI emails from her account and "knew, or should have known" that unclassified email was "not appropriate" for that means of communication, ie it was all  unauthorized.

{redux}

- I don't think he ever mentioned how Hillary ever operated on secure networks.

 

[BeaverCleaver]

1) Clinton did send and receive emails that were classified at the time;

2) Hillary's email server was negligently insecure;

3) Hillary did not archive work emails as she was required to do;

4) Hillary and her attorneys did delete emails they were required to turn over;

5) Some of the people Hillary was in regular contact with were hacked/eavesdropped by nation states;

6) Hillary herself was almost certainly hacked/eavesdropped;

7) Hillary sent classified emails unencrypted from within hostile countries; and

8) Hillary sent TS/SCI emails from her account and "knew, or should have known" that unclassified email was "not appropriate" for that means of communication, ie it was all  unauthorized.

{redux}

 but she generally did a good job nearly all of the time. 

 

[Grace Under Pressure]

So would people be suddenly satisfied if she handled classified documents 99.9% of the time? No chance. My 10 year old niece, subjected to Fox News by her parents every night, asked me "shouldn't Hillary go to prison?" She's just repeating the nonsense she hears every night. Same nonsense that's in this thread.

 

[RCon]

This is what Comey said about what Hillary did on insecure networks:

1) Clinton did send and receive emails that were classified at the time;

2) Hillary's email server was negligently insecure;

3) Hillary did not archive work emails as she was required to do;

4) Hillary and her attorneys did delete emails they were required to turn over;

5) Some of the people Hillary was in regular contact with were hacked/eavesdropped by nation states;

6) Hillary herself was almost certainly hacked/eavesdropped;

7) Hillary sent classified emails unencrypted from within hostile countries; and

8) Hillary sent TS/SCI emails from her account and "knew, or should have known" that unclassified email was "not appropriate" for that means of communication, ie it was all  unauthorized.

{redux}

- I don't think he ever mentioned how Hillary ever operated on secure networks.

So would people be suddenly satisfied if she handled classified documents 99.9% of the time? No chance. My 10 year old niece, subjected to Fox News by her parents every night, asked me "shouldn't Hillary go to prison?" She's just repeating the nonsense she hears every night. Same nonsense that's in this thread.

Which part of what Saints wrote is the nonsense to which you're referring?

 

[BeaverCleaver]

So would people be suddenly satisfied if she handled classified documents 99.9% of the time? No chance. My 10 year old niece, subjected to Fox News by her parents every night, asked me "shouldn't Hillary go to prison?" She's just repeating the nonsense she hears every night. Same nonsense that's in this thread.

So it was nonsense what Comey had to say about this?

 

[Grace Under Pressure]

Yes, it is ####### nonsense.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Yes, it is ####### nonsense.

squistion likes this

(saving him the trouble)

 

[Billy Bats]

Hopefully she doesn't

That's great, give the banks more freedom to do whatever the #### they want, as if they didn't cause enough problems already. 

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Hopefully she doesn't

They'd be perfect for each other.

 

[timschochet]

Normally Kaine is exactly the kind of Dem I like and I would love to see him in an important role. 

But winning this election is too important- it's too close. I think we need the progressives and that means Warren. Plus I love how she has taken down Trump. She's been superb.