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 (11 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hillary won this debate, hands down.  Although largely due to Trump's lack of preparedness and overall ineptness.  

I think her lead will increase a good bit as a result.  

 
Bob Magaw said:
Like a boxer who has never faced a south paw.
Click to expand...
More like going from a rain-shortened game versus AA pitching to a full game in the majors.   Hillary isn't a very good public speaker on the stump, but one of her strengths is her debate skills.  It helps greatly that she can attack with a smile (granted it's the joker smile, but it's still a smile) while he looks like your crazed uncle.  Discipline also helps...he has none and she knew when to continue to let him speak and make word salad.   

 
:lmao: at criticizing her for being overprepared.  Call me crazy but I think I'd rather the POTUS going into, say, G20 summits and foreign policy discussions overprepared rather than underprepared.

 
Jayrok said:
Hillary won this debate, hands down.  Although largely due to Trump's lack of preparedness and overall ineptness.  

I think her lead will increase a good bit as a result.  
Click to expand...
He clearly didn't realize that he needed to be prepared to do more than his typical stump speech and general assholishness 

 
Slapdash said:
He clearly didn't realize that he needed to be prepared to do more than his typical stump speech and general assholishness 
Click to expand...
That's the thing.  I believe his camp warned him and tried to prep him, but he thinks he can just wing it at the podium and shoot from the hip.  He's just a doofus.  

 
renesauz said:
I don't think that's the real argument though. The argument against Citizen's United is against the UNLIMITED donations it allows from special interest groups. Fox News can give an opinion or endorsement, but can't donate 20 million to the campaign coffers. Coca-Cola should be able to make an endorsement, but not make unlimited donations that dwarf what the law allows a private individual to make.

Count me in the group that believes Citizen's United is a real threat to true Democracy.
Click to expand...
OK, but is there a practical difference between allowing Coke to donate millions versus allowing them to purchase a month's worth of television ads promoting their preferred candidate/party/platform?

Then is there a practical difference between allowing Coke to purchase a month's worth of television ads versus Fox News running a 24x7 promotion for the GOP?

Seems silly to allow one but not the other.

 
Steve Tasker said:
:lmao: at criticizing her for being overprepared.  Call me crazy but I think I'd rather the POTUS going into, say, G20 summits and foreign policy discussions overprepared rather than underprepared.
Click to expand...
Pointy headed liberals with their nuanced views on complicated political issues. We demand simple answers!

 
Jayrok said:
That's the thing.  I believe his camp warned him and tried to prep him, but he thinks he can just wing it at the podium and shoot from the hip.  He's just a doofus.  
Click to expand...
At least we know where the bar has to be set for Hillary-like candidates going forward....now can we please refrain from going there?  We've been to the outer limits and seen what's there....no need to go back there again....tia

 
Slapdash said:
She really did a masterful job of getting in side comments that infuriated Trump, like about being given $14mm, without just relentlessly trying to attack him.  Something the Cruz/Rubio/Jeb crowd couldn't do
Click to expand...
Yeah, she had a good strategy of getting in a jab and then continuing to talk for another minute or more about more substantive stuff.  So Trump was often forced to either interrupt, which looked bad, or let the attack sit out there for a while without response, which also looked bad.  Then by the time she finished talking, Trump didn't have the focus or discipline to respond to both the attack and the substantive stuff.

 
Des Moines Register column:

Prepared Hillary Clinton clobbers Donald Trump in debate

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/opinion/columnists/kathie-obradovich/2016/09/26/obradovich-prepared-hillary-clinton-clobbers-donald-trump-debate/91133980/

Hillary Clinton summed up the first presidential debate against Donald Trump with these few sentences:

“I think Donald just criticized me for preparing for this debate. And yes, I did. And you know what else I prepared for? I prepared to be president. And I think that's a good thing.”

 
squistion said:
Nate Silver ‏@NateSilver538 10h10 hours ago

Clinton's 35-point win in the CNN post-debate poll is the 3rd largest margin ever,after Romney-Obama I and Clinton-Bush 92 townhall.
Click to expand...
I cannot complement her enough for her performance last night.  It was damn near flawless.  Not just in contrast to Trump.  Whomever advised and prepared her deserve kudos as well.  All of the strengths, not a sign of the weaknesses. A couple of times she was sort of petrified when she was exposed (TPP and emails) an expecting a bear claw that didn't come.  Those were missed chances to say something cogent by Donald that would have sparked substantial debate on facts, but whether she got lucky or not that he wasn't prepared, she was incredibly good and deserves way more consensus than she is even getting.  

 
Jayrok said:
That's the thing.  I believe his camp warned him and tried to prep him, but he thinks he can just wing it at the podium and shoot from the hip.  He's just a doofus.  
Click to expand...
Winging it is the only thing he can do. I don't think he's capable of putting in the work needed to get him up to passable.

 
honky kong said:
Winging it is the only thing he can do. I don't think he's capable of putting in the work needed to get him up to passable.
Click to expand...
The campaign has said he gets bored with prep. He doesn't like to put in the work. Everything should be easy because everything has been all his life. Born on third thinks he hit a triple.

 
Hillary definitely won. Although Trump got in some good pointed attacks early on the trade issue. But after that it was all Hillary. She just simply seemed more prepared and seemed human once or twice. Like when she couldn't control herself after the temperament thing. A real giggle and a little happy dance.

 
Jayrok:

That's the thing. I believe his camp warned him and tried to prep him, but he thinks he can just wing it at the podium and shoot from the hip. He's just a doofus.
Click to expand...
Being a doofus is not the reason why Trump was unprepared. He was unprepared because he's an arrogant narcissist.

 
NCCommish said:
The campaign has said he gets bored with prep. He doesn't like to put in the work. Everything should be easy because everything has been all his life. Born on third thinks he hit a triple.
Click to expand...
I've been trying to get everyone to read this article by the author of "The Art of the Deal".  This guy knows Trump as well as anybody.

Schwartz thought that “The Art of the Deal” would be an easy project. The book’s structure would be simple: he’d chronicle half a dozen or so of Trump’s biggest real-estate deals, dispense some bromides about how to succeed in business, and fill in Trump’s life story. For research, he planned to interview Trump on a series of Saturday mornings. The first session didn’t go as planned, however. After Trump gave him a tour of his marble-and-gilt apartment atop Trump Tower—which, to Schwartz, looked unlived-in, like the lobby of a hotel—they began to talk. But the discussion was soon hobbled by what Schwartz regards as one of Trump’s most essential characteristics: “He has no attention span.”

In those days, Schwartz recalls, Trump was generally affable with reporters, offering short, amusingly immodest quotes on demand. Trump had been forthcoming with him during the New York interview, but it hadn’t required much time or deep reflection. For the book, though, Trump needed to provide him with sustained, thoughtful recollections. He asked Trump to describe his childhood in detail. After sitting for only a few minutes in his suit and tie, Trump became impatient and irritable. He looked fidgety, Schwartz recalls, “like a kindergartner who can’t sit still in a classroom.” Even when Schwartz pressed him, Trump seemed to remember almost nothing of his youth, and made it clear that he was bored. Far more quickly than Schwartz had expected, Trump ended the meeting.

Week after week, the pattern repeated itself. Schwartz tried to limit the sessions to smaller increments of time, but Trump’s contributions remained oddly truncated and superficial.

“Trump has been written about a thousand ways from Sunday, but this fundamental aspect of who he is doesn’t seem to be fully understood,” Schwartz told me. “It’s implicit in a lot of what people write, but it’s never explicit—or, at least, I haven’t seen it. And that is that it’s impossible to keep him focussed on any topic, other than his own self-aggrandizement, for more than a few minutes, and even then . . . ” Schwartz trailed off, shaking his head in amazement. He regards Trump’s inability to concentrate as alarming in a Presidential candidate. “If he had to be briefed on a crisis in the Situation Room, it’s impossible to imagine him paying attention over a long period of time,” he said.
Click to expand...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
NCCommish said:
Iran weeks away from nukes. They have never been that close according to about every expert without a political agenda. First to come to mind
Click to expand...
"Iran's Nuclear Breakout Time: A Fact Sheet"

If Iran brought online its other nearly 9,000 IR-1s, breakout time would be about three months with natural uranium feedstock and four to six weeks with 3.5 percent UF6 feedstock. Iran has also developed the more advanced IR-2m centrifuge, rated at 5 SWU/year. If the 1,000 IR-2ms installed at Natanz were used in conjunction with all 18,000 IR-1s, the respective breakout times would be cut by a third.
Click to expand...
'Weeks' sounds scarier than 'months' but they weren't far away from producing a nuclear bomb.

 
squistion said:
:pickle:

Clinton CRUSHES Trump in post-debate polls

There you have it, folks. The polls are in, and the viewers have rendered their verdict: It was an absolute slaughter. CNN's poll shows 62 percent of those who watches the first debate felt that Hillary Clinton won, while only 27 percent said that Trump was the victor. A separate poll from PPP, meanwhile, also gave a win to Clinton, by a 51-40 margin.

For once, the pundits, the pollsters, and the people all agree. Now let’s just see how Trump reacts tomorrow.
Click to expand...
Slate has it at 55% Trump.  Which is just weird, considering how left their core audience is.  

 
I thought her "words matter" paragraph to our international allies summed up their differences in one brief paragraph. Trump is bombastic and ignorant while Clinton is measured and competent. 

Also the number of times that Trump flat out denied direct quotes which he had previously made was remarkable.

 
The Commish said:
First one that came to my mind was that she didn't say TPP was the "gold standard" at one point.
Click to expand...
She kind of tap danced more than outright lied. And ti wasn't Donald who forced her hand it was Bernie. BTW if I were her I would have said yes Obama is wrong on this. Easy call and takes some of the steam out of Trumps attacks on the subject.

 
NCCommish said:
She kind of tap danced more than outright lied. And ti wasn't Donald who forced her hand it was Bernie. BTW if I were her I would have said yes Obama is wrong on this. Easy call and takes some of the steam out of Trumps attacks on the subject.
Click to expand...
She was professing it's quality internationally well before any details were released.  I remember this because someone asked her a "how do you know" type question and she turned beet red...it was pretty funny.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
cstu said:
"Iran's Nuclear Breakout Time: A Fact Sheet"

'Weeks' sounds scarier than 'months' but they weren't far away from producing a nuclear bomb.
Click to expand...
Ok:

Clinton struck a warning note with her claim that, by the time she became secretary of state, “Iran was racing toward a nuclear capability.”

Well, actually, no. By the time Clinton took office in January 2009, at least five years had elapsed since Iran had abandoned research into nuclear weapons and fourteen months had passed since the director of national intelligence had made knowledge of that available to the nation.

“[They had] expanded their secret facilities.”

No. By January 2009 many centrifuge machines had been installed at the Natanz enrichment facility, but nearly six years had passed since the facility was declared to the International Atomic Energy Agency (so it was in no sense “secret”) and the facility itself had not been expanded at all.

“[They had] defied their international obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.”

No. More than five years had elapsed since Iran had placed under IAEA safeguards, as the NPT requires, some nuclear material that had previously been undeclared. Since then the IAEA had not found any evidence for the existence of further undeclared material (it still hasn’t).

“They hadn’t suffered many consequences.”

Actually by January 2009 Iran had been reported to the UN Security Council for “non-compliance” with its IAEA safeguards obligations (prior to mid-2003) and had been the target of four UN Security Council resolutions, three of them adopted under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, which had entailed mandatory sanctions. These were consequences far more severe than any that Israel, for instance, has ever suffered for its illegal occupation of the West Bank or its use of force against civilians in its operations in Gaza and Lebanon.

“Iran didn’t really feel the heat [of sanctions] until we turned this into an international campaign so biting that Iran had no choice but to negotiate.”

No. Negotiations got under way in Istanbul in April 2012, well before the Iranian economy “felt the heat” of the sanctions to which Clinton is referring here. The Iranians came to that meeting because the US and EU had quietly dropped a precondition that had been unacceptable to Iran: the suspension of all uranium enrichment activity during the negotiating process.

I could go on. The speech is littered with questionable assertions and factual inaccuracies (which raises doubts about what Clinton has in mind when she invites her political rivals to “debate on the basis of facts not fears”). But to do so would be tedious. Let me instead turn to the malevolence that oozes from much of this speech.

The reason this matters is simple. Malevolence colors the broader Iran policy that Clinton says she would pursue if elected president. Malevolence—or should we call it, more neutrally, “a lack of dispassion”?—inclines her to lay all the ills of a troubled region at the door of Iran, and to pledge to “confront [Iran] across the board.” It even leads her, at certain points, to sound like a bad-tempered school ma’am scolding a small boy who has had a hand in the cookie jar.
Click to expand...
That is a point by point refutation of the same claims she made in a speech at the Brooking Institute.

She wants to go to war with someone so bad she can hardly stand it.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
This TPP sets the gold standard in trade agreements to open free, transparent, fair trade, the kind of environment that has the rule of law and a level playing field,” she said in Australia in 2012. “And when negotiated, this agreement will cover 40 percent of the world’s total trade and build in strong protections for workers and the environment.”
Click to expand...

 
The General said:
Trump lady with Hannity just complained that Clinton crammed her head full of facts fro the debate and that Hillary was very smug which isn't presidential.

Whatever they are paying her is not enough :lol:
Click to expand...
#Hannity lifeline trending

Several Trump flacks gave canned, programmed, robotic critiques that Clinton was. Canned. Programmed. Robotic.

* A key moment when after repeatedly refusing to budge on the tax return disclosure, Clinton played Trump like Gilmour plays his black strat on the Comfortbaly Numb solo, by speculating that he doesn't have as much money as he claims, doesn't pay taxes and may be in bed with Russia, inducing him to dunderheadedly let the cat out of the bag with his "That makes me smart" tacit admission.      

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Commish said:
First one that came to my mind was that she didn't say TPP was the "gold standard" at one point.
Click to expand...
And now you want to approve Trans-Pacific Partnership. You were totally in favor of it. Then you heard what I was saying, how bad it is, and you said, I can't win that debate. But you know that if you did win, you would approve that, and that will be almost as bad as NAFTA. Nothing will ever top NAFTA.

CLINTON: Well, that is just not accurate. I was against it once it was finally negotiated and the terms were laid out. I wrote about that in...

TRUMP: You called it the gold standard.

(CROSSTALK)

TRUMP: You called it the gold standard of trade deals. You said it's the finest deal you've ever seen.

CLINTON: No.

TRUMP: And then you heard what I said about it, and all of a sudden you were against it.

CLINTON: Well, Donald, I know you live in your own reality, but that is not the facts. The facts are -- I did say I hoped it would be a good deal, but when it was negotiated...

TRUMP: Not.

CLINTON: ... which I was not responsible for, I concluded it wasn't. I wrote about that in my book...
Click to expand...
I will grant that she's lying on this but I don't believe she saw this irrational backlash against trade coming when she said it:

In Australia in 2012, Clinton delivered remarks on the general topic of the U.S.-Australia relationship. Here’s everything she said about the TPP in that address, with the "gold standard" comment in bold.

"So it's fair to say that our economies are entwined, and we need to keep upping our game both bilaterally and with partners across the region through agreements like the Trans-Pacific Partnership or TPP. Australia is a critical partner. This TPP sets the gold standard in trade agreements to open free, transparent, fair trade, the kind of environment that has the rule of law and a level playing field. And when negotiated, this agreement will cover 40 percent of the world's total trade and build in strong protections for workers and the environment."
Click to expand...
TPP is going to pass and the sky will not fall.

 
The election is over folks.

375-400 EVs for Hillary.

You should start mapping out the cabinet. Cheryl Mills will be WH Counsel, Chief of Staff or AG, we know that much.

Start filling in old Clinton retreads like Shelala from there, usual suspects from the 90s and past campaigns.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
NCCommish said:
Ok:

That is a point by point refutation of the same claims she made in a speech at the Brooking Institute.

She wants to go to war with someone so bad she can hardly stand it.
Click to expand...
If she wanted to go to war with Iran she would have been against the deal with Iran.  :confused:

 
cstu said:
I will grant that she's lying on this but I don't believe she saw this irrational backlash against trade coming when she said it:

TPP is going to pass and the sky will not fall.
Click to expand...
TPP is going to make NAFTA look great by comparison. It is a complete giveaway to multi-national corporations. Sovereignty ceases to exist unless our corporate masters are cool with it.

 
cstu said:
If she wanted to go to war with Iran she would have been against the deal with Iran.  :confused:
Click to expand...
You might want to check out all the caveats. And her excessively hawkish statements toward Iran. She is a neocon. She pals around with neocons. She says neocon things. She has been critical of Obama's policy not going far enough. Make no mistake a Hillary Clinton presidency as she herself has said will include a "muscular" foreign policy. Code for less talk more bombing. She has also called for a direct confrontation with Russia over Syria. By implementing a no fly zone. Does that sound even remotely like a good idea?

 
I thought she lost the debate in her opening speech rambling about the rich paying their "fair share" (whatever that means) and women making as much as men.  (which has been thoroughly debunked over and over and over again)

She keeps commenting about giving money to middle class to create more jobs but she fails to point out its the corporations and business owners that she is trying to hurt that actually create these jobs.  I absolutely loathe this woman.

 
pantherclub said:
I thought she lost the debate in her opening speech rambling about the rich paying their "fair share" (whatever that means) and women making as much as men.  (which has been thoroughly debunked over and over and over again)

She keeps commenting about giving money to middle class to create more jobs but she fails to point out its the corporations and business owners that she is trying to hurt that actually create these jobs.  I absolutely loathe this woman.
Click to expand...
And what did Donald say?

 
pantherclub said:
I thought she lost the debate in her opening speech rambling about the rich paying their "fair share" (whatever that means) and women making as much as men.  (which has been thoroughly debunked over and over and over again)

She keeps commenting about giving money to middle class to create more jobs but she fails to point out its the corporations and business owners that she is trying to hurt that actually create these jobs.  I absolutely loathe this woman.
Click to expand...
One of my few real quibbles with her as she remained calm though that Trump madness storm was when she was calling for more profit sharing.  I wasn't sure where she was going by that.  Was she proposing legislating it?  I'm all for it in businesses that want to provide that incentive and think it's in their best interest to do so, but that felt in that region between imperialist overlord and expert panderer.  

 
I feel so much better today overall because I'm okay with any outcome.

Least favored: Trump wins.  Would suck but may spark substantial change to establishment politics even as we ride a horrible tempest.  

Favored: Hillary wins and Congressional investigations smoke out that truth of the emails and cover-ups, she gets impeached and Kaine takes over.

Most favored:. Same as #1 only key staff (Mills particularly) are held responsible and fired from the administration with rebuke and Hillary remains in office but heavily scrutinized and largely untrusted enough to prevent major shift towards globalism until she's 4 and out.  

 
Last edited:
Mr. Ham said:
I feel so much better today overall because I'm okay with any outcome.

Least favored: Trump wins.  Would suck but may spark substantial change to establishment politics even as we ride a horrible tempest.  

Favored: Hillary wins and Congressional investigations smoke out that truth of the emails and cover-ups, she gets impeached and Kaine takes over.

Most favored:. Same as #1 only key staff (Mills particularly) are held responsible and fired from the administration with rebuke and Hillary remains in office but heavily scrutinized and largely untrusted enough to prevent major shift towards globalism until she's 4 and out.  
Click to expand...
Kaine would make a horrible president. And no matter what Hillary is going to be heavily scrutinized by both sides of the aisle.

 
NCCommish said:
TPP is going to make NAFTA look great by comparison. It is a complete giveaway to multi-national corporations. Sovereignty ceases to exist unless our corporate masters are cool with it.
Click to expand...
NC, I've been for TPP as you know, but I believe it's become a casualty of this election. It's not going to pass. You can chalk that up as a victory for Sanders. 

 
timschochet said:
NC, I've been for TPP as you know, but I believe it's become a casualty of this election. It's not going to pass. You can chalk that up as a victory for Sanders. 
Click to expand...
Tim there is every indication that it will be passed in the lame duck session. Corporations want their ROI and they are going to get it.

 
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
259K
rockaction
rockaction
HellToupee
***Official*** Joe Biden 2016 Presidential Thread
Replies
35
Views
2K
That one guy
T

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 11 (members: 0, guests: 11)
Back
Top