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.
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
This is a really small sample size.
Click to expand...
True, but it's also rational behavior based on the way our elections work. You'd expect people to gravitate towards one of two parties, especially if a third party vote is followed by a presidency those third party voters don't like.  This won't change unless we adopt proportional representation in some form or another. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Politician Spock said:
Wall Street wants two parties. It's a better return on their investment than having to own three.
Click to expand...
To the extent they do own those parties, it's with the hope of nudging them towards business friendly policies like reducing environmental and public safety regulation, reducing securities compliance burdens, and flattening tax rates.  In other words they're buying political parties in hopes of making them look slightly more like Gary Johnson and Libertarians.

Ivan is right that there is some corporate welfare interest as well, so I'd amend my previous statement about Johnson being the wet dream of Wall Street and Fortune 500 boardrooms to exclude the handful of companies that rely heavily on government contracts.  But otherwise, yeah, it stands.  If all four candidates had an equal chance of winning, who do you think Exxon/Mobil would prefer? How about Walmart?  You don't think the car companies would love to see a Libertarian in office to rein in those pesky EPA folks who recently caught Volkswagen and Harley-Davidson installing emissions defeat devices and polluting the atmosphere?  They'd be lined up around the block to throw their millions at him.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
TobiasFunke said:
To the extent they do own those parties, it's with the hope of nudging them towards business friendly policies like reducing environmental and public safety regulation, reducing securities compliance burdens, and flattening tax rates.  In other words they're buying political parties in hopes of making them look slightly more like Gary Johnson and Libertarians.

Ivan is right that there is some corporate welfare interest as well, so I'd amend my previous statement about Johnson being the wet dream of Wall Street and Fortune 500 boardrooms to exclude the handful of companies that rely heavily on government contracts.  But otherwise, yeah, it stands.  If all four candidates had an equal chance of winning, who do you think Exxon/Mobil would prefer? How about Walmart?  You don't think the car companies would love to see a Libertarian in office to rein in those pesky EPA folks who recently caught Volkswagen and Harley-Davidson installing emissions defeat devices and polluting the atmosphere?  They'd be lined up around the block to throw their millions at him.
Click to expand...
So Wall Street gets what it wants regardless of who wins. 

It's a moot point. And welcome to America.

 
squistion said:
Nate Silver ‏@NateSilver538 Aug 25

Trump chances:

538 polls-plus—25%

Betfair—21% 

538 polls-only—17%

NYT/Upshot—12%

Daily Kos Elections—11%

Princeton Election Consortium—4%

Nate Silver ‏@NateSilver538 3h3 hours ago


Trump odds (8/30):

538 polls-plus—26%

Daily Kos Elections—26%

Betfair—23%

538 polls-only—21%

NYT/Upshot—12%

Princeton Election Consortium—5%
Click to expand...
"Maybe it's time to jettison this horrible candidate"

 
TobiasFunke said:
I think you're probably helping Trump anyway.  Polls show Clinton gets harmed more than Trump when third party candidates get a boost in the polls. And if the matching program is based on party affiliation it's worth noting that more Rs lean Clinton than Ds lean Trump, so it may actually match two people who would vote for Clinton if they were forced to choose between the two major party candidates.

But I'd think your bigger concern would be that you're helping the Democratic and Republican parties in the future. Third party success in one presidential election doesn't help such efforts in successive elections- in fact the opposite seems to happen in the last half-century.
Click to expand...


I didn't click through to the link.  Are they matching Ds and Rs or likely HCs and DTs?

Regarding your second statement, times change.  I can point to things like Bernie's campaign and gay marriage.  Also the last third party candidate was a little bit nutty. 

 
PA, VA, CO firmly blue. Need to secure New Hampshire for the win pretty much. Have to imagine Bernie will be utilized there in the coming weeks. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006 said:
The Dude Prescribes, man.

The guy is a flake nut. And Bornstein wouldn't lose his license, Hillary's Dr would, but I am guessing there's no way he/she would let that info out for anything (nor would any decent doctor).
Click to expand...
So confused....is the guy :hophead:  after seeing them or just :hophead:  even though he hasn't seen them?

 
Tens of thousands of emails (or at least 14K, plus we will see after that) recovered from The Secret Server.

First up on the Foia parade: 30 emails on the Benghazi militia attack recovered. Linkage.

> Inevitable.

> Trying to think of a legitimate reason these would have been deleted.

The government will take a full month to review and redact the 30.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
From Kos of Daily Kos:

Who do you think should play Donald Trump for Hillary Clinton's debate prep?

We are in the pre-debate psychological warfare phase of the campaign, with both camps trying to psych each other out. If you want to read about how Hillary Clinton is working to needle Donald Trump into an outburst, or how Trump is too perfect to practice, then click through that link! Me, I want to focus on this part of the article:


Around the Clinton campaign, the question of whom to cast as Mr. Trump has become something of a running parlor game. Mrs. Clinton’s allies have floated several options: Representative Joseph Crowley of New York, who is from Queens, where Mr. Trump grew up; James Carville, Mr. Clinton’s chief strategist in 1992, who has a gift for lacerating banter; or Mark Cuban, another billionaire businessman. All three are viewed as unafraid to say some humiliating things to Mrs. Clinton’s face, as Mr. Trump may.



I have better choice: comedian Lewis Black. But Black is actually liberal, and while he has the abrasive don’t-give-a-#### styling of Trump, he actually knows stuff. He’s not known as an actor, so could he fake being an ignoramus? 

So how about Andrew Dice Clay? He’s a bona fide ####### who wouldn’t have to fake misogyny. And he doesn’t know #### about anything, just like Trump. 

Who do you think should play Trump in Clinton’s debate prep? 

 
Clinton aide Abedin concerned about email security in Russia, documents show


...
Then-deputy Secretary of State Jacob Lew had been tasked with getting the traveling group local cellphones, Abedin added: "Hopefully lew can also pass on numbers so you can reach us direct on tuesday and wednesday. We will be checking email periodically, but for the most part cell phones will be fastest way to reach us."

"Fyi for tues and wed. We won’t have berries in russia," Abedin wrote in a subsequent email, forwarding her message to top Clinton Foundation official Doug Band and others, including Hannah Richert, a director at the Clinton Presidential Center; Oscar Flores, manager of the Clintons' Chappaqua, New York, home; Jon Davidson, Bill Clinton's deputy chief of staff; and Justin Cooper, an aide to the former president whose name is registered as the owner of Clinton's personal server.

Cooper responded to Abedin, asking, "Are they taking them from u. Bc ur clintonemail.com shld work."

"Its for security reasons," Abedin responded. "I don’t want to use that one either."


The latest email release comes as the Democratic nominee faces renewed scrutiny over the relationship between her family's foundation and the State Department in her four years in office. Last week, the FBI said it had uncovered nearly 15,000 emails related to work that had not been turned over to the State Department.
Click to expand...


http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/clinton-email-russia-trip-huma-abedin-227531#ixzz4IsZVTF4V
 
- Justin Cooper worked for Teneo, the private consulting firm which was founded in 2009.
 


 
Last edited by a moderator:
FBI vs. State Department Over Hillary Clinton’s Secrets



The FBI and the State Department are squabbling over whether Clinton’s personal lawyers had the right security clearances to personally store her emails.
...

In July, FBI Director James Comey testified before the House Oversight and Government Reform that Clinton’s attorneys didn’t have the security clearances they needed. The FBI elaborated in a statement this week to The Daily Beast, saying “most of the attorneys representing former Secretary of State Clinton in this matter did not have the appropriate security clearances to review special access program material,” which is highly secret information that is restricted only to a few people based on their need to know.
...The bureau didn’t specify which lawyers didn’t have the right clearances, but Clinton has been represented by at least two lawyers in matters related to her email, including her longtime personal attorney, David Kendall, of Williams & Connolly, and his colleague, Katherine Turner.

...


The question was pressing enough that a State Department legal adviser sent several emails marked “URGENT” to the security officers who had been in charge of vetting Clinton’s attorneys’ offices and setting up the safe.
“Do any of the attorneys have TS [top secret] clearances?” the adviser, Sarah Prosser, wrote, apparently not knowing the answer. The replies from her colleagues are heavily redacted, but the exchanges make clear that State’s attorneys tried to sort out the issue at a critical time.
On the same day Prosser sent the message, the FBI took possession of the thumb drive from Clinton’s lawyers. They would no longer be allowed to keep the emails in their office.
...

The decision to give the attorneys a safe was approved by the State Department’s Diplomatic Security Bureau, “taking into account all relevant factors including security clearances and access controls,” Trudeau said. State also provided “instructions for how to secure the material (up to the secret level of classification),” the second-highest of the three basic classification levels the government uses.
“Through a physical security expert, we confirmed that they were taking those measures,” Trudeau continued. “The Department also informed counsel that additional steps would be required if the Department determined the material contained more highly classified information.”
That ultimately proved unnecessary because the FBI came in August and took the thumb drive. At the time, investigators also seized Clinton’s private server. In going through those records, investigators determined that Clinton’s lawyers hadn’t actually read all her emails when they tried to sort out which ones were work-related—the ones that ended up on the thumb drive—and which ones were personal. The lawyers deleted those.
Last week, the FBI revealed that investigators have found another 15,000 emails that Clinton’s attorneys never turned over. ...
Click to expand...
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/08/29/fbi-vs-state-department-over-hillary-clinton-s-secrets.html

-- So Kendall's firm would have been committing a crime... except they were saved by the fact that they never read the emails they were destroying in the first place.

Good thing for them.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Larger font size Saints!

Larger font!

The legally blind here can't read your headlines.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
squistion said:
We are in the pre-debate psychological warfare phase of the campaign,
Click to expand...


Mr. Trump, in the interview, said he saw little use in standing at lecterns and pretending to debate his opponent.

“I know who I am, and it got me here,” Mr. Trump said, boasting of success in his 11 primary debate appearances and in capturing the Republican nomination over veteran politicians and polished debaters. “I don’t want to present a false front. I mean, it’s possible we’ll do a mock debate, but I don’t see a real need.”

Mr. Trump’s certitude — “I know how to handle Hillary,” he said — reflects his belief that the debates will be won or lost not on policy points and mastery of details, which are Mrs. Clinton’s strengths, but on the authenticity, boldness and leadership that the nominees demonstrate onstage. Mr. Trump is certain that he holds advantages here, saying Mrs. Clinton is likely to come across as a typical politician spouting rehearsed lines.
Click to expand...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006 said:
Mr. Trump, in the interview, said he saw little use in standing at lecterns and pretending to debate his opponent.

“I know who I am, and it got me here,” Mr. Trump said, boasting of success in his 11 primary debate appearances and in capturing the Republican nomination over veteran politicians and polished debaters. “I don’t want to present a false front. I mean, it’s possible we’ll do a mock debate, but I don’t see a real need.”
Click to expand...
Who is he kidding? He can't go in cold on something that important and wing it and he knows it.

And you can be assured that his new team of advisors will have him participating in a mock debate if they have to throw a net over him and drag him to the lectern.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
So now the deleted emails included only personal ones related to yoga class, wedding plans, Benghazi, emails to Bill...

 
squistion said:
Who is he kidding? He can't go in cold on something that important and wing it and he knows it.

And you can be assured that his new team of advisors will have him participating in a mock debate if they have to throw a net over him and drag him to the lectern.
Click to expand...
Point spread on a Clinton/Trump debate?  Be like the SF/SD Super Bowl.  Hillary -21.

 
squistion said:
Who is he kidding? He can't go in cold on something that important and wing it and he knows it.

And you can be assured that his new team of advisors will have him participating in a mock debate if they have to throw a net over him and drag him to the lectern.
Click to expand...
It's an open question to me and others I guess whether he's trying to win it or what he's trying to do (market a new tv network, his own brands, who knows). An insult-fest is not beyond the pale and he doesn't need prep for that. On the other hand it may just be a stupid attempt at mind games, or maybe he's totally prepping and he's going to be prepared and professional or try to be, who knows.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
BeaverCleaver said:
And the Hillary supporters will say she won the thing no matter what. 
Click to expand...
I challenge this statement. President Obama lost his first debate with Mitt Romney, badly. And I can't think of a single Obama fan in this forum (or elsewhere for that matter) who didn't acknowledge it.

In this cycle, the irrationality, the delusions, are all on one side.

 
timschochet said:
BeaverCleaver said:
And the Hillary supporters will say she won the thing no matter what. 
Click to expand...
I challenge this statement. President Obama lost his first debate with Mitt Romney, badly. And I can't think of a single Obama fan in this forum (or elsewhere for that matter) who didn't acknowledge it.

In this cycle, the irrationality, the delusions, are all on one side.
Click to expand...
Yup.  Bravo to Hillary getting all those delusional and irrational people to support her.

 
timschochet said:
I challenge this statement. President Obama lost his first debate with Mitt Romney, badly. And I can't think of a single Obama fan in this forum (or elsewhere for that matter) who didn't acknowledge it.

In this cycle, the irrationality, the delusions, are all on one side.
Click to expand...
Not sure about this Tim.....there's plenty of delusion to go around.

 
Now CK is a political pundit as well...this might sway the election.

San Francisco 49er quarterback Colin Kaepernick, who recently refused to stand during the national anthem at a preseason game, just unloaded on Hillary Clinton.

“We have a presidential candidate who has deleted emails and done things illegally and is a presidential candidate,” he said, referring to the 15,000 emails Clinton “wiped” from her private, unsecured server she used during her tenure as secretary of State. “That doesn’t make sense to me.”



 



“If it was any other person, they’d be in prison,” he said.” So what is this country really standing for?”

 
squistion said:
Larger font size Saints!

Larger font!

The legally blind here can't read your headlines.
Click to expand...
I think it's more the conceptually blind, because those headlines suggest the Clinton team lied and lawyered themselves out of yet another crime, with an assist from State.

 
TobiasFunke said:
Wolf!  Wolf!
Click to expand...
The FBI has packed up its briefcase and put the files away. Anything here is in the abstract, no one is calling out Wolf or even want the villagers to run away. Everyone's pretty happy with wolf running around free in the village now, we can all relax.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Grace Under Pressure said:
Thus rendering a who won argument basically useless. Impossible to ever say who "won", it's subjective.
Click to expand...
Not always. Everyone was in agreement that Obama lost the first debate to Romney.  The commentators at MSNBC were acting like their hair was on fire and I thought Chris Matthews was going have a stroke.

And then we have this moment from another debate in which there was a clear winner to most observers from this exchange:

"Please proceed Governor"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFwtuInlMew

 
 


Mark Elliott ‏@markmobility


Field offices

FL: Clinton 34 Trump 1

NC: Clinton 30 Trump 0

PA: Clinton 36 Trump 2

Trump "If I lose it was rigged!"
Click to expand...
- This is stupid now, right?

- There hasn't been any legitimate policy discussion because Trump doesn't have any legitimate policies, and there really isn't a race because one of the campaigns isn't even racing.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
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
253K
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