The Clinton Thread II

Status
Not open for further replies.
On the subject of fakeness I am glad the media picked up on how Hillary embellished her grandparents immigrant stories.

If there is 2 things I hate it's when people embellish their background or come up with a embellished if not fake story of somebody they met along the campaign trail who just happens to support your stance on a certain issue.

If the media vets all these stories maybe we will stop getting them

Eh almost every politician does that. to some degree. No need to waste time vetting stories that dont matter. Frankly I dont care who her grandparents were or what they did. Im not voting for them.

And Clinton isnt lying and exagerating this stuff just to be doing it. Politics are a game and you either play the game or you lose. So I can forgive her and others for having to play the game that predates them. I just let the stories go in one ear and out the other, because these stories dont sway my vote. I care about their past poltical decisions and how they handle themselves in various situations.
 
Last edited:
Eh almost every politician does that. to some degree. No need to waste time vetting stories that dont matter. Frankly I dont care who her grandparents were or what they did. Im not voting for them.

And Clinton isnt lying and exagerating this stuff just to be doing it. Politics are a game and you either play the game or you lose. So I can forgive her and others for having to play the game that predates them. I just let the stories go in one ear and out the other, because these stories dont sway my vote. I care about their past poltical decisions and how they handle themselves in various situations.

I am sorry I just hate stories from the campaign trail and my BS detector goes off more often then not to the validity of them.

It just seems like a way to avoid talking about actual issues, so if people start calling those stories out then maybe politicians will stop doing it
 
I am sorry I just hate stories from the campaign trail and my BS detector goes off more often then not to the validity of them.

It just seems like a way to avoid talking about actual issues, so if people start calling those stories out then maybe politicians will stop doing it

No need to apologize. I hate the way politicians try to relate to the "common man" with their himespun blue collar stories too. It makes my skin craw and its disengenuous in the extreme. Hell, Ill go so far as to say i hate these stories even when they are true. Growing up in poverty or telling me that they or their grandparents suffered in some way doesnt incline me to vote for them. Living in a one bedroom house when they were a kid doesnt qualify them to run the country. It might get some sympathy from me but I dont give sympathy votes to presidential candidates. Most people dont put their childhood and ancestorsal struggles on their resumes when they are seeking employment so why do politicians? Just get outa here with that ****, I say. Because you are right that it would be better if they took the time to talk about actual issues.

Its just at this point this tactic is so common that I dont think the media vetting is going to stop it. And if these stories are vetted its such an inconsequential lie that they told that calling then out on it probably isnt going to hurt them substantially.
 
Is it wrong I want to vote for Hillary because I just want to see how a woman will do as president? We need real change I think.
 
Is it wrong I want to vote for Hillary because I just want to see how a woman will do as president? We need real change I think.
That is just bad as NOT voting for Hilary because she is a woman.
 
I imagine she'd be a slightly more hawkish Obama. So, she would bomb seven countries instead of six.

Maybe she'll get a Nobel Peace Prize too.
 
Hillary Clinton Vows to Address Problems She & Her Husband Helped Cause

1231869417051757157.jpg


Yesterday, Hillary Clinton hopped aboard the anti-police state wave, announcing in a speech at Columbia University that police brutality and over-incarceration were cultural malignancies that Had To Stop. The move, politically expedient given ongoing unrest in several cities over recent high-profile cases of deadly police brutality, is a little puzzling, considering that today’s problems are partially due to the sort of policy Clinton herself was championing in the 1990’s.

Clinton’s speech was resonant and powerful, if the only thing you know about Hillary Clinton is that she just drove across the country in a van to meet with “ordinary Iowans,” she doesn’t tip at Chipotle (nobody does!), or that one of her opponents, Rand Paul, has very similar views but cannot express anything without sounding like a a**hole. She condemned the militarization of police, excessive force by officers, legal exceptionalism when it comes to officers who break the law, and the jailing of nonviolent criminals. All of those are good things to condemn, because they are morally bad and inhumane and, to a lesser extent, pour billions of dollars into the pockets of the sort of person who owns prisons or companies that manufacture deadly weapons. We shouldn’t be giving those people money. They’ll just spend it on more evil.

Inspiring and zeitgeisty 2015 Hillary Clinton might be disturbed, then, by the following passage in a book called, It Takes A Village, written in 1996 by a woman named Hillary Clinton. In a paragraph dug up by journalist Zaid Jilani, 1996 Clinton hails the virtues of the “three strikes law” and a ballooning police force.

The Washington Post’s Philip Bump further points out that incarceration rates skyrocketed during the Bush, Clinton, and Dumber Younger Bush administrations.

We’ll note again that the increase in the prison population began prior to Bill Clinton. During the administration of George H. W. Bush, the number of prisoners sentenced to more than a year increased by 40 percent. Under Clinton — who served twice as long — it went up 46 percent. Under the first Bush, the black prison population grew 46.7 percent. Under Clinton, it grew over 50 percent.​

Bump further notes that violent crime peaked shortly after Clinton took office and declined noticeably throughout the 90’s, while the prison population continued to grow.

It would be cynical to expect that humans are incapable of ideologically evolving, that viewpoints held at some arbitrary date should be gently ethered, pinned, and displayed above the mantle forever. Clinton’s certainly entitled to evolve; she’s been in the public eye for so long that she’s bound to abandon antique views in favor of better, shinier ones. But Clinton’s evolution has often seemed (and pardon the Clinton cliché here) calculated and self-enriching, and it’s hard to hear her saying the words she said yesterday without recalling other times the former Secretary of State has changed her mind when it no longer benefits her.

In Ryan Lizza’s should-read New Yorker story on Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren’s role in the 2016 Presidential campaign, Lizza notes that a similar evolution occurred in the late 1990’s, when Warren (then a law professor) spent years rallying liberals to oppose a bill that would reform bankruptcy in a way she saw as unfairly favorable to credit card companies. It nearly became law toward the tail end of Clinton’s second term. And then:

Warren targeted the one person in the White House who she believed could stop the legislation: the First Lady. They met alone for half an hour, and, according to Warren, Hillary stood up and declared, “Well, I’m convinced. It is our job to stop that awful bill. You help me and I’ll help you.” In the Administration’s closing weeks, Hillary persuaded Bill Clinton not to sign the legislation, effectively vetoing it.

But just a few months later, in 2001, Hillary was a senator from New York, the home of the financial industry, and she voted in favor of a version of the same bill. It passed, and George W. Bush signed it into law, ending Warren’s ten-year war with a crushing defeat.​

Fifteen years later, Clinton’s back to decrying the fact that “the deck is still stacked in favor of those at the top.”

Lizza asked Warren if she thought Clinton’s recent Woman of the People turn was simply the former Secretary of State horning in on well-trod Warren territory in order to win progressive support heading into the primaries. Warren replied: “Eh.”

Eh, indeed.

http://jezebel.com/hillary-clinton-vows-to-address-problems-she-her-husb-1701241476/+LeahBeckmann

That's a politician for ya
 
That's actually fairly encouraging for Republicans. It is still an uphill battle for them, but encouraging none-the-less.
 
I am starting to think that the democrats are making a huge mistake in taking Clinton over Webb or O'Malley. It is going to happen. Clinton will easily win the nomination. And I really believe she is bound to lose the general election. Her latest poll numbers from Quinnipac are very low. She is losing to Bush, Rubio, Walker and a couple others in key swing states. Even in her base states her likeability numbers are horrendous. There is a feeling of inevitability about her. People have accepted she will be the democratic nominee out of obligation more than anything. That spells disaster in a general election. Ask John McCain.
 
Hillary's problem is that she is becoming the Democratic version of Mitt Romney. People don't find her trustworthy or being able to connect with her.
 
Hillary's problem is that she is becoming the Democratic version of Mitt Romney. People don't find her trustworthy or being able to connect with her.


Yep. And the more she tries, the more phoney she comes off.
The beer koozies...lord. :facepalm: It stinks of desperation and does nothing to help her.

She could've had an outstanding legacy as SecState and then transitioned into an elder stateswoman role in the party. Instead, I think she is going to run yet another failed campaign and destroy any semblance of a legacy she may have had.
 
Hillary Clinton will be the first woman President of the USA. Its her destiny, and NO ONE WILL STOP HER FROM FULFILLING HER DESTINY!
 
Well, I'm going with Sanders but if she wins the nom I'm sure I will vote for her. She just doesn't seem to be rallying the troops like Obama did before her
 
She just doesn't seem to be rallying the troops like Obama did before her

In defense of Hillary I think she would be stupid to go all out hardcore campaigning at this point in time. The election is a year and 3 months away. I wouldn't really start stepping it up till like a month before the Iowa primaries
 
Well, I'm going with Sanders but if she wins the nom I'm sure I will vote for her. She just doesn't seem to be rallying the troops like Obama did before her

Same here. Im voting for Sanders in the primaries, but Ill vote for Hilary before I vote for anyone that the GOP is offering. Jeb managed to slip further down my "No ****ing Way" list when he said he would get us out of the Iran deal if he were president. And Scott Walker said he would straight tear it up his first day in office. So to hell with those two fools.
 
Same here. Im voting for Sanders in the primaries, but Ill vote for Hilary before I vote for anyone that the GOP is offering. Jeb managed to slip further down my "No ****ing Way" list when he said he would get us out of the Iran deal if he were president. And Scott Walker said he would straight tear it up his first day in office. So to hell with those two fools.

I remember a week or so ago me and Hippie disagreed that there was a difference between High Up Democrat and Republican foreign policy, I think Iran(and Cuba as well) shows a difference that makes one side slightly better. It just feels like the Republicans have this Cold War 1960s and 70s view on how we should conduct foreign policy.

It's almost comical listening to Republicans speak about the Iran deal how if it happens that somehow the US will be under attack. Simple fact is whether the deal works or fails the US security in regards to Iran will be no different. I also love the fact the the Republicans candidates who say they will get rid of it conveniently ignore the fact that 6 countries signed this and if they backed out it would make little difference to how those countries deal with Iran and probably be a black mark on the US(grant you they just praying ont he stupidity of their base that likes tough foreign policy talk)
 
An internal government review of Clinton's emails by the State Department and intelligence committee states that Clinton did indeed send classified information through her private email account. Out of a sample of 40 emails, 4 of them contained classified information. However, because they were not labeled as classified it is unknown if Clinton willingly sent classified information or if she did it by accident. The Justice Department has received a referral from at least one inspector general that could lead to a criminal investigation.
 
Investigative reporter Kurt Eichenwald explains in Newsweek how the Times botched Thursday’s Hillary Clinton email investigation story, which, “either out of recklessness, ignorance or intentional deception—makes it seem as if the inspectors general are saying Clinton mishandled classified information. They didn’t.”

http://www.newsweek.com/hillary-clinton-new-york-times-emails-357246
 
I think the biggest thing for me about Hillary is the email snafu and the Benghazi scandal. Otherwise , I would vote for her because she has a good social policy regarding society's problems today
 
I’m watching a documentary about how evil Hillary Clinton is, and it provides zero information or points. I’m 25 minutes in and it’s just “She lies!” with no examples, and just unflattering pictures of her from camera angles with bad lighting, exposing all her natural aging imperfections.

Also, Ann Coulter is one of the interviewees. :whatever:

And this whole “White Water Scandal”, nobody ever explains what it is. Does anybody actually know the gist of it? Republicans just say, “Hillary’s evil! White Water! Scandal!” and don’t elaborate.

I think the term “White Water” is a manipulative, strategic term for people to associate with evil, because the image of white water makes you think of sperm, and that then correlates with Bill Clinton and how “immoral” and “sinful” the Clinton name is.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,273
Messages
22,078,370
Members
45,878
Latest member
Remembrance1988
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"