Official Hillary Clinton 2016 thread (3 Viewers)

[BassNBrew]

And its very unlikely Hillary is winning in 2020.  She would have lost this election against almost any other republican.  Its not difficult to find a republican candidate that will beat Hillary in favorability ratings or likability.  Huntsman, Kasich, Ryan, Romney, and several others who I porbably can't think of off the top of my head.

Really?  Four years to fine tune the machine with the DOJ and FBI under her control.  Usually incumbents win and they're somewhere between 0% and 10% corrupt.  

 

[timschochet]

Tim, I think you mean well but in this case it is completely obvious you have no clue what you are talking about.  Germany and Japan bounced back from complete devastation because those countries possess fundamental qualities that over hundreds (or in Japan's case thousands) of years have served them very well.  It has little and likely nothing to do with "our commitment to providing (stability)".  Indeed, the fact that you think their ability to rebuild and maintain stable government and civilization is because of the US shows how comprehensively you misunderstand the issue. 

OK. I actually didn't disagree with your point about those "fundamental qualities" in my post, just expanded on it. But I notice you have no rebuttal other than "you have no clue what you're talking about." I wouldn't say I'm a historical expert but I'm a pretty big fan of modern history. I've read several books on this subject. I studied it in college. I wrote an essay on the Berlin Airlift for my major. And I've read even more books on Middle East history. So yeah I think I do know a little about this subject. 

What I wrote above is definitely controversial. You're welcome to disagree with me and many people do. But please don't patronize me or insult me by stating Im clueless. At least on the his issue, I'm not. 

 

[TobiasFunke]

You'll get a Bush and like it. - The Establishment

Listen, I enjoy chuckling at this Establishment/media/elite conspiracy nonsense, but you've gotta make it a little more plausible.   We're still in an election cycle where an actual Bush lost badly to a populist lunatic despised by anyone you could reasonably consider to be part of "The Establishment."  At least give it another six months or so. Right now this post is akin to arguing that Major League Baseball is rigged to put the Red Sox or the Yankees in the World Series every year.

 

[The Commish]

That's largely up to you Saints. Are you going to continue breathlessly reporting every Clinton rumor and/or potential scandal, detail by detail? Or will we start fresh and look at her Presidency as a new chapter in our history, without looking backwards?

Not sure these are mutually exclusive Tim and that's the problem.  If Clinton continues to push the envelope and fan the smoke, I suspect SiD will continue.  To the second part of your comment, if we ignore the past we are doomed to repeat it.  It's probably way late for that reminder, but this notion of a "clean slate" is as naive as one who pushes the narrative that Hillary didn't struggle with Trump and all of Trump's missteps were because Hillary was a master at politics instead of the obvious "Trump is the biggest idiot we've seen run for office ever". 

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

You'll get a Bush and like it. - The Establishment

Bush VP/Bush VP/Bush/Clinton/Clinton/Bush/Bush/Clinton as SOS/Clinton running for office/Clinton..

.Gosh I wonder what will happen next.

 

[cobalt_27]

Her opponent really is weak.  He's the worst candidate in my lifetime, and it is not close.  I don't mean "the person I disagree with the most."  I mean "the person least capable of mounting a successful campaign."  By that metric, he's probably the worst candidate ever in American history, but maybe there's some now-anonymous guy out there that I'm overlooking.  Beating him is not a harbinger of great political acumen.  

And to this point--I agree with everything you said about the ineptitude of his candidacy--but it really wasn't until the 11th hour and release of video tape of him joking about sexually abusing women (and then an avalanche of accusations that made the jokes real) that their poll numbers began to diverge.  Interestingly, Hillary's approval/favorability ratings today (40%) are as abysmal as they were in January (39%).  It's not as though she's elevated her stock or even shown great political acumen, as you noted.  It's not about the "Machado Trap" as @timschochet wants everyone to think.  It's that Trump has completely cratered by his own undoing.  Those independents that can't stand Hillary are now saying they'll vote for her because the alternative is this ghastly, bloated, orange buffoon.  

 

[TobiasFunke]

Not sure these are mutually exclusive Tim and that's the problem.  If Clinton continues to push the envelope and fan the smoke, I suspect SiD will continue.  To the second part of your comment, if we ignore the past we are doomed to repeat it.  It's probably way late for that reminder, but this notion of a "clean slate" is as naive as one who pushes the narrative that Hillary didn't struggle with Trump and all of Trump's missteps were because Hillary was a master at politics instead of the obvious "Trump is the biggest idiot we've seen run for office ever". 

This is two posts in ten minutes that both seem to forget that Trump destroyed a field of 16 other GOP primary candidates and won the nomination easily.

Either those were the 16 stupidest politicians on the face of the earth and Clinton just happens to be the 17th-stupidest and there's also n enormous game between 16th-worst and 17th-worst ... or we should acknowledge that Clinton deserves at least a little credit if she wins this thing by the comfortable margin the polls currently show.

 

[Grace Under Pressure]

With mountains of evidence on HRC's corruption piling up how can anyone support her?

This election has exposed our system and media. If we elect her, are we even the "good guys" anymore?

Simmer down.

Have been noticing this more and more from the Trumps. "The country is going to be destroyed under Hillary" and similar hyperbole. Grow up.

 

[Workhorse]

People are not bothered by us just handing weapons to random Middle east rebels?  

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/14068

These are Hillary's exact words to John Podesta (in 2014):

In the past the USG, in an agreement with the Turkish General Staff, did not provide such heavy weapons to the Peshmerga, out of a concern that they would end up in the hands of Kurdish rebels inside of Turkey. The current situation in Iraq, not to mention the political environment in Turkey, makes this policy obsolete. Also this equipment can now be airlifted directly into the KRG zone.

The United States has been providing arms to the Peshmerga since the mid-70s.  Who the hell do you think has been keeping ISIS at bay in Northern Iraq the past several years and is doing the heavy lifting in Mosul right now?  If you think the Peshmerga are "random Middle East rebels", you need to study up on Middle East dynamics.

Hillary's analysis here is spot on IMO.

 

[The Commish]

This is two posts in ten minutes that both seem to forget that Trump destroyed a field of 16 other GOP primary candidates and won the nomination easily.

Either those were the 16 stupidest politicians on the face of the earth and Clinton just happens to be the 17th-stupidest and there's also n enormous game between 16th-worst and 17th-worst ... or we should acknowledge that Clinton deserves at least a little credit if she wins this thing by the comfortable margin the polls currently show.

The GOP is a ####show   Anger drove the whole thing....rank them as you want, you're essentially arguing the tallest midget.  I am not in the category of "Hillary would have been destroyed by....." camp either.  Outside of maybe Kasich, I don't think there was a viable person in the group and he had no chance given the narratives thrown out during the primaries.  Quantity destroyed any hopes of quality in the GOP this time around.  This shouldn't be news and should be rather obvious to all.  As it was going down, I couldn't really believe what I was watching, but it happened nonetheless.

ETA:  And if you insist on having this conversation, please remember those voting in the primaries are not nearly the same make up of those voting in the general.  This is the central fact I based all my comments/predictions on as to legitimacy of Trump as a candidate.  Our only hope is that more of the typical GOP voters wake up and realize where they went wrong (same with the Dem primary voters) and we get a wider variety of people engaged in the primaries.

 

[BassNBrew]

Listen, I enjoy chuckling at this Establishment/media/elite conspiracy nonsense, but you've gotta make it a little more plausible.   We're still in an election cycle where an actual Bush lost badly to a populist lunatic despised by anyone you could reasonably consider to be part of "The Establishment."  At least give it another six months or so. Right now this post is akin to arguing that Major League Baseball is rigged to put the Red Sox or the Yankees in the World Series every year.

I hope you're right.  Too my surprise I heard there was another Bush in the weeds a while ago.  If they had taken Trump seriously they could have snuffed him out early.  You don't hold back your ace in the ALCS for the WS.

Money wins these elections.  I've actually seen a really good Trump ad here recently in between ten of so decent Hillary ads.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

The United States has been providing arms to the Peshmerga since the mid-70s.  Who the hell do you think has been keeping ISIS at bay in Northern Iraq the past several years and is doing the heavy lifting in Mosul right now?  If you think the Peshmerga are "random Middle East rebels", you need to study up on Middle East dynamics.

Hillary's analysis here is spot on IMO.

I was going to post a point about how Hillary appears to have emailed classified information between two unauthorized servers..... but that link is down. It is no longer accessible.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

I'll just throw this out there: at this rate I think by 2024 there's a pretty decent shot the GOPe opposition to whoever the Clintons put up to follow them will come from within the Democratic Party itself.

These candidates, voters and issues  don't go away, they just switch parties.

 

[Workhorse]

I was going to post a point about how Hillary appears to have emailed classified information between two unauthorized servers..... but that link is down. It is no longer accessible.

Yeah, that's a whole different discussion and a serious issue.  But Dodds was making a (really misinformed) point against the policy itself.

 

[cobalt_27]

This is two posts in ten minutes that both seem to forget that Trump destroyed a field of 16 other GOP primary candidates and won the nomination easily.

Either those were the 16 stupidest politicians on the face of the earth and Clinton just happens to be the 17th-stupidest and there's also n enormous game between 16th-worst and 17th-worst ... or we should acknowledge that Clinton deserves at least a little credit if she wins this thing by the comfortable margin the polls currently show.

I think it's instructive, but not terribly impressive, that Trump whittled down the field of 16 opponents like he did.  In a field that large, it starts just by getting noticed.  Trump knew how to do that.  He was in the news cycle constantly and tapped into the Tea Party hysteria, and the apparent strategy of the other 16 candidates clearly seemed to be to pick each other off and not offend Trump until they had risen to the top.  But, by then it was too late.  He effectively rallied a base to the extent that he needed only ~35% or so to win the early states.  And by April, Rubio looked like a clown, Cruz was viewed as a slime ball, and Kasich was seen as too vanilla.  

There will be books written about this election for decades.  But, the political calculus by this field was an epic fail, and all Trump had to do was get his face out there and make headlines.

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

This is a really good point.  I can already see the foam coming out of their mouths.

If this election fiasco doesn't wake up the Republican Party then nothing will and they deserve to be blown up.  But this country will suck with one party in charge especially a corrupt one.  We need the checks and balances.

 

[Slapdash]

This is two posts in ten minutes that both seem to forget that Trump destroyed a field of 16 other GOP primary candidates and won the nomination easily.

Either those were the 16 stupidest politicians on the face of the earth and Clinton just happens to be the 17th-stupidest and there's also n enormous game between 16th-worst and 17th-worst ... or we should acknowledge that Clinton deserves at least a little credit if she wins this thing by the comfortable margin the polls currently show.

Or maybe, just maybe, different people vote in the GOP primary and general election

 

[TobiasFunke]

Or maybe, just maybe, different people vote in the GOP primary and general election

Pretty sure it's some of both.  The point is she deserves some credit here, assuming she wins by a margin similar to what the polls are showing.  They haven't always shown that sort of margin.  Clinton exposed Trump in a way that none of the primary candidates was able to do. There have to be thousands of Alicia Machado type stories out there.  Machado herself might not have worked on GOP primary voters, but they could have done the same thing with, say, a small businessman he screwed over, or a particular person taken in by the Trump U scam, or God knows who else has been in the receiving end of Trump's crap over the years.  Why were they unable to do what Clinton did?

 

[Slapdash]

Pretty sure it's some of both.  The point is she deserves some credit here, assuming she wins by a margin similar to what the polls are showing.  They haven't always shown that sort of margin.  Clinton exposed Trump in a way that none of the primary candidates was able to do. There have to be thousands of Alicia Machado type stories out there.  Machado herself might not have worked on GOP primary voters, but they could have done the same thing with, say, a small businessman he screwed over, or a particular person taken in by the Trump U scam, or God knows who else has been in the receiving end of Trump's crap over the years.  Why were they unable to do what Clinton did?

The 14 million or so Trump voters in the primary didn't and still don't care about any of these issues. 

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

Hillary had the advantage of being one-on-one.  From the perspective of a Republican candidate in a large field, picking a fight with Trump was just helping get some other non-Trump candidate get the nomination.

 

[TobiasFunke]

The 14 million or so Trump voters in the primary didn't and still don't care about any of these issues. 

They don't care about small businesses?  I mean I guess it's possible since they used to say they cared about "family values" and we now know that was a lie, but they have to stand for something (other than bigotry), right?

At this point I don't know how anyone can deny that she had a role in exposing him and did so skillfully.  Polls after all three debates gave her wins.  She's increased her lead over him considerably since the start of the debates.  None of this happened after any GOP debates. Obviously part of it is that the early GOP debates were too crowded for anyone to shine, but the candidates had their chances in later debates.

 

[The Commish]

Pretty sure it's some of both.  The point is she deserves some credit here, assuming she wins by a margin similar to what the polls are showing.  They haven't always shown that sort of margin.  Clinton exposed Trump in a way that none of the primary candidates was able to do. There have to be thousands of Alicia Machado type stories out there.  Machado herself might not have worked on GOP primary voters, but they could have done the same thing with, say, a small businessman he screwed over, or a particular person taken in by the Trump U scam, or God knows who else has been in the receiving end of Trump's crap over the years.  Why were they unable to do what Clinton did?

Speaking from an opponent point of view only here

Why would I waste my time on stuff like this knowing that his support would not care about such things?  It MIGHT have meant he got a couple million less votes, but most of his support, dare I say, couldn't have cared less about stuff like this.

Now...the media?  Why didn't they bring this stuff up?  That's a good question.  I am guessing they were happy with the eyeballs they were getting, so they didn't feel the need to do more.  Just spit balling here.  

 

[The Commish]

They don't care about small businesses?  I mean I guess it's possible since they used to say they cared about "family values" and we now know that was a lie, but they have to stand for something (other than bigotry), right?

At this point I don't know how anyone can deny that she had a role in exposing him and did so skillfully.  Polls after all three debates gave her wins.  She's increased her lead over him considerably since the start of the debates.  None of this happened after any GOP debates. Obviously part of it is that the early GOP debates were too crowded for anyone to shine, but the candidates had their chances in later debates.

If they did, they wouldn't have been voting for Trump in the first place  

 

[rodg12]

Pretty sure it's some of both.  The point is she deserves some credit here, assuming she wins by a margin similar to what the polls are showing.  They haven't always shown that sort of margin.  Clinton exposed Trump in a way that none of the primary candidates was able to do. There have to be thousands of Alicia Machado type stories out there.  Machado herself might not have worked on GOP primary voters, but they could have done the same thing with, say, a small businessman he screwed over, or a particular person taken in by the Trump U scam, or God knows who else has been in the receiving end of Trump's crap over the years.  Why were they unable to do what Clinton did?

She definitely deserves credit for the outstanding opposition research her team has conducted.  Been a huge win for her.  The huge field of Republicans worked in Trump's favor in several ways, IMO.  First, the other candidates had to worry about besting 16 candidates as well so they couldn't focus opposition research on just Trump.  Second, it REALLY caused Trump to standout and allowed him to play into the 'outsider' gambit.  Third, it watered down the votes for the other guys.  They cannibalized each other's votes.  This isn't absolving the Reps from not sending Trump to the woodshed right after Iowa (which voted for Cruz, btw), but they definitely had some things working against them.

 

[T J]

Hillary doesn't deserve any credit. The Democratic Party is the party of the free ride and as long as they keep the gravy train rolling I don't think it matters much who they put up.

 

[The Commish]

Speaking of Ted Cruz....it was either this thread or one of the debate threads, someone asked "what if" someone like Trump came into the frey but was a relatively polished politician without all the over the top rhetoric...what would happen then?

That person is Ted Cruz....and we don't need to find out, do we?  How about we all forget that little experiment, please!

 

[The Commish]

She definitely deserves credit for the outstanding opposition research her team has conducted.  Been a huge win for her.  The huge field of Republicans worked in Trump's favor in several ways, IMO.  First, the other candidates had to worry about besting 16 candidates as well so they couldn't focus opposition research on just Trump.  Second, it REALLY caused Trump to standout and allowed him to play into the 'outsider' gambit.  Third, it watered down the votes for the other guys.  They cannibalized each other's votes.  This isn't absolving the Reps from not sending Trump to the woodshed right after Iowa (which voted for Cruz, btw), but they definitely had some things working against them.

And she does get the credit one deserves for putting a team together over the last XX number of years that can go do this sort of research.  Execution was questionable at one point and it felt like she couldn't get out of her own way again, but the amount of material provided her made it foolproof.  I DO question why the media outlets that have had this info on Trump for all this time didn't release it early on...that was like bringing gasoline to a bonfire though.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Hillary doesn't deserve any credit. The Democratic Party is the party of the free ride and as long as they keep the gravy train rolling I don't think it matters much who they put up.

Trump offered plenty of 'free' himself, he was to the left of Hillary on a few issues.

 

[Slapdash]

Speaking from an opponent point of view only here

Why would I waste my time on stuff like this knowing that his support would not care about such things?  It MIGHT have meant he got a couple million less votes, but most of his support, dare I say, couldn't have cared less about stuff like this.

Now...the media?  Why didn't they bring this stuff up?  That's a good question.  I am guessing they were happy with the eyeballs they were getting, so they didn't feel the need to do more.  Just spit balling here.  

You've also got to figure that some of these guys were very reluctant to get into the mud and sabotage their future changes

 

[knowledge dropper]

Simmer down.

Have been noticing this more and more from the Trumps. "The country is going to be destroyed under Hillary" and similar hyperbole. Grow up.

Stay asleep.  

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Good one.

 

[Slapdash]

They don't care about small businesses?  I mean I guess it's possible since they used to say they cared about "family values" and we now know that was a lie, but they have to stand for something (other than bigotry), right?

At this point I don't know how anyone can deny that she had a role in exposing him and did so skillfully.  Polls after all three debates gave her wins.  She's increased her lead over him considerably since the start of the debates.  None of this happened after any GOP debates. Obviously part of it is that the early GOP debates were too crowded for anyone to shine, but the candidates had their chances in later debates.

She gets credit but not very much.  She was better than him in the debates primarily because he was unprepared and could not stay on topic, particularly after being needled 

 

[Joe Summer]

Commish:

Speaking of Ted Cruz....it was either this thread or one of the debate threads, someone asked "what if" someone like Trump came into the frey but was a relatively polished politician without all the over the top rhetoric...what would happen then?

That person is Ted Cruz....and we don't need to find out, do we? How about we all forget that little experiment, please!

Not sure if I would describe Ted Cruz as "polished" and "without over-the-top rhetoric".

Also, are you the guy who is the spelling Nazi or are you the anti-spelling-Nazi guy? I can't remember. Anyway, it's "fray", not "frey".

 

[Northern Voice]

I thought she came across very well at the Al Smith dinner.  Obviously that owes a lot to her writers but Trump couldn't even read his jokes other people wrote for him cleanly.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

I thought she came across very well at the Al Smith dinner.  Obviously that owes a lot to her writers but Trump couldn't even read his jokes other people wrote for him cleanly.

Always painful to watch a comedian bomb.

I happen to agree with Tobias on his assessment - I mean she needed to step up to the plate and hit a home, she did exactly that - but if people want to see a microcosm of this campaign they should look at those two speeches.

 

[RCon]

This is two posts in ten minutes that both seem to forget that Trump destroyed a field of 16 other GOP primary candidates and won the nomination easily.

Either those were the 16 stupidest politicians on the face of the earth and Clinton just happens to be the 17th-stupidest and there's also n enormous game between 16th-worst and 17th-worst ... or we should acknowledge that Clinton deserves at least a little credit if she wins this thing by the comfortable margin the polls currently show.

Primary Voters != General Election Voters

This should be obvious, but apparently bears repeating.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

From:doug@presidentclinton.com To: john.podesta@gmail.com, jpodesta@americanprogress.org

Date: 2011-11-17 12:50 Subject: Re:

Also I signed a conflict of interest policy as a board member of cgi
 
On it, I wrote that my wife designs bags for cgi, and loses money doing so plus donating her time And that teneo represents 4 cgi sponsors, 3 of which teneo brought to cgi .
 
Oddly, wjc does not have to sign such a document even though he is personally paid by 3 cgi sponsors, gets many expensive gifts from them, some that are at home etc I could add 500 different examples of things like this and while I removed lasry bc they are all on the offense, I get the sense that they are trying to put some sort of wrong doing on me after the audit as a crutch to change things and if I don't mention things like lasry where they all have issues, I may regret it

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/21978
 
- Doug Band, director of Teneo.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

i removed he lasry section all together

This is Marc Lasry.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Tax returns you will not be seeing, ever:

- WJC LLC.

- ZFS Holdings LLC.

 

[Mile High]

 he was unprepared and could not stay on topic, particularly after being needled 

That's a huge part of why he would be a terrible president.

 

[kface]

Trump offered plenty of 'free' himself, he was to the left of Hillary on a few issues.

This is the other fundamental part I don't understand about the trump ticket...he is honestly the most left wing candidate to run in an election from either side for a long time.  What he is proposing is nothing short of astonishing.  

Republicans should feel comfortable with Hillary because she is actually pretty right of centre

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

This is the other fundamental part I don't understand about the trump ticket...he is honestly the most left wing candidate to run in an election from either side for a long time.  What he is proposing is nothing short of astonishing.  

Republicans should feel comfortable with Hillary because she is actually pretty right of centre

It's true. And IMO she has sought their votes. And also IMO Bill Clinton's presidency is the most conservative since Reagan and maybe more than Ronnie too.

 

[kface]

It's true. And IMO she has sought their votes. And also IMO Bill Clinton's presidency is the most conservative since Reagan and maybe more than Ronnie too.

Part of the problem is I think a lot of republicans are one issue voters...abortion and guns.  I get the sense there isn't a lot of economic republicans left...seems like they are mostly social conservatives and gun nuts...at least in the primaries

 

[Grace Under Pressure]

Stay asleep.  

Compelling argument. The country's getting destroyed because of Hilary, I'm just asleep. 

 

[Slapdash]

That's a huge part of why he would be a terrible president.

Yep, and the best part of the debates is every time HRC says that he got $14mm from his daddy.  He cannot let that slide

 

[Slapdash]

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/21978
 
- Doug Band, director of Teneo.

TDOSS notes on this one?

 

[cstu]

Part of the problem is I think a lot of republicans are one issue voters...abortion and guns.  I get the sense there isn't a lot of economic republicans left...seems like they are mostly social conservatives and gun nuts...at least in the primaries

Can't blame them for leaving - Republicans have proven themselves no more economic conservative than Democrats (they just spend the money in different places) and are embarrassing on every other issue.

 

[Sammy3469]

And to this point--I agree with everything you said about the ineptitude of his candidacy--but it really wasn't until the 11th hour and release of video tape of him joking about sexually abusing women (and then an avalanche of accusations that made the jokes real) that their poll numbers began to diverge.  Interestingly, Hillary's approval/favorability ratings today (40%) are as abysmal as they were in January (39%).  It's not as though she's elevated her stock or even shown great political acumen, as you noted.  It's not about the "Machado Trap" as @timschochet wants everyone to think.  It's that Trump has completely cratered by his own undoing.  Those independents that can't stand Hillary are now saying they'll vote for her because the alternative is this ghastly, bloated, orange buffoon.  

FWIW, that's inaccurate.  The poll numbers diverged after the first debate.  All the tape (and more importantly his response) did was reinforce and solidify her advantage.  I believe she was up like 1.6% before the first debate, 5.1% after it, and then 6.8% or so after the second.  Point being is that when he finally had to answer general election questions he wilted, but he ran a fine campaign before then.

Yes, his weaknesses have been exposed at this point, but until that debate he was still teflon and had a viable path to victory.  She was good enough in that debate to exploit his weakness.  She doesn't get enough credit for that as shown by 16 other Republicans not being able to pierce that bubble.    

 

[cstu]

This is the other fundamental part I don't understand about the trump ticket...he is honestly the most left wing candidate to run in an election from either side for a long time.  What he is proposing is nothing short of astonishing.  

Republicans should feel comfortable with Hillary because she is actually pretty right of centre

I don't know 'right and left' are anymore on a bunch of issues.  The President has a job to do and to do it means doing things the considered on the 'right'.  On social issues there's no question she is on the 'left', even if it's 'center left'. 

 

[cstu]

Stay asleep.  

I would bet my life you said the exact same thing about Obama 8 years ago.