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 (13 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.
That's not the way politics works.  If millennials think their causes are better off under Trump than Hillary then they are in for a rude awakening.
Yes, that is how politics work. People will make the choice to vote for the candidate they want and some will choose not to vote. 

 
Yes, that is how politics work. People will make the choice to vote for the candidate they want and some will choose not to vote. 
I was referring to which candidates run - you don't get to choose that.  Choosing not to vote if you feel strongly that one candidate is unsuitable for the job and would be a disaster for the country is shameful.

 
I was referring to which candidates run - you don't get to choose that.  Choosing not to vote if you feel strongly that one candidate is unsuitable for the job and would be a disaster for the country is shameful.
Why do you feel a person wouldn't vote at all if they felt ONE candidate isn't suitable for the job?

 
If Johnson or stein are closer to what one believes, then that is where your vote should go. The only way to create change is to vote for what's good, instead of who is less evil. Stein's support of the Native American fight going on now means more than all the BLM or Wall building we've heard.

 
timschochet said:
538 has Hillary down to 60% (from 70 a week ago). 

One significant problem I heard yesterday: 41% of millennials who supported Bernie are now planning to vote for Gary Johnson. That's way too big a number. That alone could allow Trump to win this election. 

These kids don't like Hillary; they never have. But they don't seem to realize what the effect will be of their vote. Both Bernie and Warren are going to Ohio this weekend as part of a plan to reverse this trend; hopefully it's not too late. 
The problem isn't what they fail to realize.

The problem is what you failed to realize when you were promoting her to get the DNC nomination. You heard how unlikeable she is... you just didn't care. 

 
"The fire marshall is extremely unlikable, so I let my house burn to the ground. Really, it's the mayor's fault for hiring him in the first place."

 
If Johnson or stein are closer to what one believes, then that is where your vote should go. The only way to create change is to vote for what's good, instead of who is less evil. Stein's support of the Native American fight going on now means more than all the BLM or Wall building we've heard.
Yeah she's definitely the second-most impressive 9/11 truther lunatic out there, at worst. I'd still probably vote for Pete Carroll over her, though. Tough call.

 
I'm reconsidering my initial reaction to Trump's statement this morning- I thought it would help him because all the headlines would say is that Trump now admitted Obama was born in the USA- nothing else. 

But the initial reaction- at least so far- is deep anger- especially from African-Americans. The resurgence of this issue may serve to energize them behind Clinton in a way nothing else has before. This could be a turnaround. 

 
I'm reconsidering my initial reaction to Trump's statement this morning- I thought it would help him because all the headlines would say is that Trump now admitted Obama was born in the USA- nothing else. 

But the initial reaction- at least so far- is deep anger- especially from African-Americans. The resurgence of this issue may serve to energize them behind Clinton in a way nothing else has before. This could be a turnaround. 
I'll bet all the black people who were planning on voting for Trump both changed their minds over this.  

 
I'm reconsidering my initial reaction to Trump's statement this morning- I thought it would help him because all the headlines would say is that Trump now admitted Obama was born in the USA- nothing else. 

But the initial reaction- at least so far- is deep anger- especially from African-Americans. The resurgence of this issue may serve to energize them behind Clinton in a way nothing else has before. This could be a turnaround. 
Wishful thinking. 

 
The problem isn't what they fail to realize.

The problem is what you failed to realize when you were promoting her to get the DNC nomination. You heard how unlikeable she is... you just didn't care. 
No I did not. I wanted her because she was the closest to my views. I'll never regret that. 

In any case it's too late to wonder about it. Here we are. It's Hillary or Trump. 

 
I'll bet all the black people who were planning on voting for Trump both changed their minds over this.  
Not the point Ivan. One of the reasons that Trump is currently ahead in Florida is that pollsters believe that blacks won't vote for Hillary in the same numbers they did for Obama- they're not energized enough, so it's predicted their numbers will revert to 2004 levels. If something like this brings them close to 2008 or 2012, then Hillary will win Florida- and with it the election. 

 
I'm reconsidering my initial reaction to Trump's statement this morning- I thought it would help him because all the headlines would say is that Trump now admitted Obama was born in the USA- nothing else. 

But the initial reaction- at least so far- is deep anger- especially from African-Americans. The resurgence of this issue may serve to energize them behind Clinton in a way nothing else has before. This could be a turnaround. 
I'm reconsidering that the media may actually have a spine and call a lie, a lie.  They aren't buying his Hillary started this BS.  A tiny step forward.  

 
I'm reconsidering that the media may actually have a spine and call a lie, a lie.  They aren't buying his Hillary started this BS.  A tiny step forward.  
That's a big part of it. I have heard both CNN and MSNBC state unequivocally that this was a lie by Trump several times this morning. 

 
I'm reconsidering my initial reaction to Trump's statement this morning- I thought it would help him because all the headlines would say is that Trump now admitted Obama was born in the USA- nothing else. 

But the initial reaction- at least so far- is deep anger- especially from African-Americans. The resurgence of this issue may serve to energize them behind Clinton in a way nothing else has before. This could be a turnaround. 
it will make no difference in the election

 
Not the point Ivan. One of the reasons that Trump is currently ahead in Florida is that pollsters believe that blacks won't vote for Hillary in the same numbers they did for Obama- they're not energized enough, so it's predicted their numbers will revert to 2004 levels. If something like this brings them close to 2008 or 2012, then Hillary will win Florida- and with it the election. 
seems if Trump had Jeb as an ally that would have really help him. and same can be said of Ohio and john kasich. both of states are real close. 

 
http://www.factcheck.org/2015/07/was-hillary-clinton-the-original-birther/

It is interesting though that it apparently originated from supporters of Hillary. According to some on this board only mouth breathing, racist bigots believe the "birther" thing.
Is it?  I dunno.  I think if I were a Trump supporter I perhaps might not want to go down the path of holding presidential candidates accountable for some of the things said by their craziest supporters.

You comfortable associating Trump with that message?  By the way there's literally hundreds more where that came from.

 
Is it?  I dunno.  I think if I were a Trump supporter I perhaps might not want to go down the path of holding presidential candidates accountable for some of the things said by their craziest supporters.

You comfortable associating Trump with that message?  By the way there's literally hundreds more where that came from.
WTF are you talking about? I made a comment that it was interesting that some of Hillary's supporters started the birther thing and comments made here by people about those that believe the birther thing. :rolleyes:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Is it?  I dunno.  I think if I were a Trump supporter I perhaps might not want to go down the path of holding presidential candidates accountable for some of the things said by their craziest supporters.

You comfortable associating Trump with that message?  By the way there's literally hundreds more where that came from.
Hillary supporter tried to shoot Trump, but you're comparing that to a random troll on twitter?

Hillary supporter killed cops because she added fuel to the fire when it came to BLMs, but you're comparing that to a random troll on twitter?

Hillary supporter shot up the nightclub in Florida and the guys father visited a Hillary rally, but you're comparing that to a random troll on twitter?

By the way, there's literally hundreds more examples of dangerous Hillary supporters.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
WTF are you talking about? I made a comment that it was interesting that some of Hillary's supporters started the birther thing and comments made here by people about those that believe the birther thing. :rolleyes:
Fair enough.  Given that this is the Hillary Clinton thread I assumed you were trying to make it about Clinton herself, but I can see that you were only talking about her supporters (some of whom, of course, were mouth-breathing bigots just like the rest of the birthers).  Withdrawn. 

I'm gonna leave that link up though.  Can't be too vigilant in making people aware of such things, I figure.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Not sure of this at all. 

Michele Obama is giving a speech for Hillary  this afternoon. She's sure to touch on this subject. 
sorry, I stand corrected as I didn't realize Michele was giving a speech today.  game changer!

in all seriousness, I just don't buy that people go out an vote against someone.  some do and some will but the numbers will not be significant.  the key to getting out the vote is getting folks on the fence in terms of going to the polls to for vote something or more importantly for someone.

 
:lol:   From one of the most right leaning Democrats senators from a red state. This from last December:

http://www.grandforksherald.com/opinion/featured-columnists/3893537-onlooker-why-heitkamp-your-daddys-democrat-defies-obama

THE ONLOOKER: Why Heitkamp-'Your Daddy's Democrat'-defies Obama

Mike Nowatzki of Forum News Service portrays North Dakota Democrats as being puzzled about the voting record of U.S. Sen. Heidi Heitkamp, D-N.D.



Nowatzki led a Sunday story this way:



"When asked once if she voted with her heart or her constituents, Heitkamp said she responded, 'I vote with my head.'"

"But several of her recent votes have some Democrats scratching their own heads."

There's really no need for head scratching. Heitkamp votes her heritage, and that includes both head and heart.

Heitkamp belongs to an earlier Democratic Party, a competitive party that fielded candidates and filled state offices for nearly half a century—a party that existed before today's emphasis on political correctness, the nanny state and environmental purity.


Heitkamp is a Democrat of another generation. You might think of her as "Your Daddy's Democrat."
Yesterday's Democratic Party was a rural-based machine that emphasized economic issues. Its great pillars were the North Dakota Farmers Union and the rural electric cooperatives. Organized labor was inside the tent, though it didn't always get what it wanted.

There was a small, vocal intellectual wing of the party. There were important pockets in the state's largest cities—Minot, Fargo and Grand Forks, particularly—which had large numbers of working people.




 
I still am going to vote for Trump, but I am not buying all the "it is really close" polling  that just magically came out. 

I don't normally play the :tinfoilhat:  card but this sure smells like an effort to make it seem close. The Dems can see a lot of people are not energized to vote for Clinton like they want, so if they make it seem like it could go either way, more people will come out.  This just seems manufactured in my opinion . 

 
sorry, I stand corrected as I didn't realize Michele was giving a speech today.  game changer!

in all seriousness, I just don't buy that people go out an vote against someone.  some do and some will but the numbers will not be significant.  the key to getting out the vote is getting folks on the fence in terms of going to the polls to for vote something or more importantly for someone.
Last time Michelle gave a speech she seemed able to both criticize Trump and praise Clinton pretty effectively. 

And it seemed to work out fairly well in the polls that followed.

 
Last time Michelle gave a speech she seemed able to both criticize Trump and praise Clinton pretty effectively. 

And it seemed to work out fairly well in the polls that followed.
I'm assuming you are referring the convention. I'm guessing perhaps 1% of the people that watched that speech will hear this one and are you really trying to tie Hillary's convention bump solely to Michelle's speech?  

My apologies if you are referring to something else.

 
I still am going to vote for Trump, but I am not buying all the "it is really close" polling  that just magically came out. 

I don't normally play the :tinfoilhat:  card but this sure smells like an effort to make it seem close. The Dems can see a lot of people are not energized to vote for Clinton like they want, so if they make it seem like it could go either way, more people will come out.  This just seems manufactured in my opinion . 
I think another possible explanation is that the current polling was mostly taken during and immediately after the furor over her collapse and her health and the deplorables debate. I'm as certain a Clinton supporter as pretty much anyone around here, and even I was thrown for a loop when I first heard about the fainting spell- not in the sense that I would consider voting for Trump, but more of a "can she really do the job"? kind of thing. And lots of Dems criticized her transparency on health issues after that, so I assume it also played poorly with undecideds. 

Like I said, if Trump is still tied in polls that come out around the middle of next week, we'll know this virtual tie is the real deal.

 
I'm assuming you are referring the convention. I'm guessing perhaps 1% of the people that watched that speech will hear this one and are you really trying to tie Hillary's convention bump solely to Michelle's speech?  

My apologies if you are referring to something else.
I was.  And I agree nothing she says today will be a game-changer by itself. But consistent support from Michelle and Barack down the stretch could be, and this birther stuff gives them even more of an opening than they already had just by being the president and first lady.

 
in all seriousness, I just don't buy that people go out an vote against someone.  some do and some will but the numbers will not be significant.  the key to getting out the vote is getting folks on the fence in terms of going to the polls to for vote something or more importantly for someone.
I think you're correct most of the time. But just as Donald Trump has defied most conventional wisdom thus far, he may defy this rule as well. I believe there will be a lot of energized people in November determined to vote AGAINST Trump. 

 
I think another possible explanation is that the current polling was mostly taken during and immediately after the furor over her collapse and her health and the deplorables debate. I'm as certain a Clinton supporter as pretty much anyone around here, and even I was thrown for a loop when I first heard about the fainting spell- not in the sense that I would consider voting for Trump, but more of a "can she really do the job"? kind of thing. And lots of Dems criticized her transparency on health issues after that, so I assume it also played poorly with undecideds. 

Like I said, if Trump is still tied in polls that come out around the middle of next week, we'll know this virtual tie is the real deal.
If you listen to/ read 538, the polls were tightening prior to the fainting. In my humble opinion, the tightening was Trump's near complete domination of the news cycle as Hillary went underground hoping he would implode. I will vote for her and I think she will make a good president but she has to be the worst "candidate" in decades. So many dumb moves when she should be steamrolling this joke of an opponent. 

 
If you listen to/ read 538, the polls were tightening prior to the fainting. In my humble opinion, the tightening was Trump's near complete domination of the news cycle as Hillary went underground hoping he would implode. I will vote for her and I think she will make a good president but she has to be the worst "candidate" in decades. So many dumb moves when she should be steamrolling this joke of an opponent. 
Her comment about the "deplorables" probably didn't help with her latest poll numbers as well. 

 
If you listen to/ read 538, the polls were tightening prior to the fainting. In my humble opinion, the tightening was Trump's near complete domination of the news cycle as Hillary went underground hoping he would implode. I will vote for her and I think she will make a good president but she has to be the worst "candidate" in decades. So many dumb moves when she should be steamrolling this joke of an opponent. 
From what I could tell as a non-expert, they seemed to be tightening since the conventions but also starting to flatten out around a 2-3 point lead in the week or two prior to last weekend. And then since then they've moved into a virtual tie.

A steady 2-3 point lead is still not great- as we've seen that means a single slip-up can turn it into a coin flip. But is a lot better the current situation. It's basically what Obama maintained over Romney during the later stages of 2012, and I don't ever remember being all that concerned about Obama losing to Romney. Of course Clinton is no Obama, and a Romney presidency is a lot less concerning than a Trump one.

 
No I did not. I wanted her because she was the closest to my views. I'll never regret that. 

In any case it's too late to wonder about it. Here we are. It's Hillary or Trump. 
What do you mean "no I did not". I said nothing about why you wanted her. I said you failed to realize why so many others don't want her, and just how large that group is.  

 
In the two most recent national elections, a lot of Obama's success came down to superior voter targeting.  Famously, Romney's system crashed on election day.  Do we have any sense of how Trump's efforts to stand this type of thing up are?

 
In the two most recent national elections, a lot of Obama's success came down to superior voter targeting.  Famously, Romney's system crashed on election day.  Do we have any sense of how Trump's efforts to stand this type of thing up are?
Trump has said he has no interest in data operations or ground game. 

 
Trump has said he has no interest in data operations or ground game. 
The RNC does, though, and there's obviously a lot of overlap there. 

There's a reason I see lots of Trump ads when I'm watching a baseball game with a large suburban Virginia audience but not a single one when I'm watching Atlanta, yes? Somebody is at the switch there, right?  Maybe not, maybe it's just one guy in an office saying "I think white people watch this" and that's the extent of it. I don't really know how this works.

Anyway, I think the ground game stuff will hurt Trump a little, but not nearly as much as people think.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top