Is Hillary In More Trouble?

[Revoltingest]

You have more faith and trust in the USA political system than I do. I don't trust those people any further than I can spit.
Tom

Faith?
No, not I.
I just don't believe that they're so competent that they could pull off the claimed scheme.

 

[columbus]

Faith?
No, not I.
I just don't believe that they're so competent that they could pull off the claimed scheme.

I try to look at the big picture.
Bernie is making ridiculous claims. Free college for all. Trump is also. An 80' wall from the gulf of Mexico to the Pacific ocean.
And people get excited by this nonsense.
So. Two of the biggest deals in the election are both saying stupid things. Hillary is not. By the process of elimination, I conclude that they are both Clintonistas. Trump is in control of the right wing of the Republicrats, and Sanders is in control of the left.
Enter, Queen Clinton.
It could be worse. But there you have it.
Tom

 

[Revoltingest]

I try to look at the big picture.
Bernie is making ridiculous claims. Free college for all. Trump is also. An 80' wall from the gulf of Mexico to the Pacific ocean.
And people get excited by this nonsense.
So. Two of the biggest deals in the election are both saying stupid things. Hillary is not. By the process of elimination, I conclude that they are both Clintonistas. Trump is in control of the right wing of the Republicrats, and Sanders is in control of the left.
Enter, Queen Clinton.
It could be worse. But there you have it.
Tom

Clinton makes ridiculous claims of her own.
They just go unnoticed by her fans.
(Check me signature for one.)

 

[metis]

I don't think there's as much a conspiracy as it is that the rules of the DNC tend to favor the more establishment candidates, which were designed as such several decades ago-- thus the super-delegates, which more pledge establishment.

However, remember that in 2008, many of those s-d's that were pledged to Hillary schlepped to Barach when it became clear he was viable and gaining strength.

 

[columbus]

Clinton makes ridiculous claims of her own.
They just go unnoticed by her fans.
(Check me signature for one.)

Not like Sanders and Trump do.
I could easily see myself voting for Kasich, depending on what happens between now and election day.


And your sig looks like quote mining.
Women suffer a lot in war, in many ways. Without the glory of dying for a cause.
Tom

 

[Revoltingest]

And your sig looks like quote mining.

Is that what it's called when someone favored is caught on
the record saying something amazingly stupid & bigoted?
(Btw, I read it in its full context.)

 

[metis]

I like Kasich and could vote for him but for two big exceptions, namely that he has taken the position that he'd roll-back most of the ACA, plus he said he'd be appointing new SCOTUS justices and that they need to be conservative.

Nah, I'd vote for Hillary over him most any day of the week.

 

[columbus]

Is that what it's called when someone favored is caught on
the record saying something amazingly stupid & bigoted?
(Btw, I read it in its full context.)

No.
That is when somebody attributes one little snippet, implying things not actually said, to misrepresent somebody else.
It is possible that Clinton thinks that only women bleed. But I doubt that.
BTW, I have no idea what the context of your quote was.
Tom

 

[Revoltingest]

No.
That is when somebody attributes one little snippet, implying things not actually said, to misrepresent somebody else.
It is possible that Clinton thinks that only women bleed. But I doubt that.
BTW, I have no idea what the context of your quote was.
Tom

You criticize without knowing the context,
only presuming that she means otherwise?
That's risky.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Bernie is making ridiculous claims. Free college for all.

How is that absurd? Even Saudi Arabia offers tuition-free college. Germany does it because they decided that even really cheap was still cost-prohibitive for some. And even if it's not tuition free, it still puts the subject up for debate to work for much more affordable tuition such as in Canada.

 

[columbus]

I like Kasich and could vote for him but for two big exceptions, namely that he has taken the position that he'd roll-back most of the ACA, plus he said he'd be appointing new SCOTUS justices and that they need to be conservative.

Nah, I'd vote for Hillary over him most any day of the week.

I'd roll back Romneycare myself, given the chance.
And I think Kasich's idea of a conservative SCOTUS judge is probably very different from Cruz' conservative SCOTUS judge.
Nothing is absolute, it is all a spectrum of possible outcomes.
Tom

 

[columbus]

You criticize without knowing the context,
only presuming that she means otherwise?
That's risky.

I am criticizing you, not Clinton. That isn't very risky.

Tom

 

[Revoltingest]

I am criticizing you, not Clinton. That isn't very risky.

The risky part is that you don't know the context of the quote.
Without any basis (other than perhaps defense of Hillary), you called it "quote mining".
That's what's risky.

 

[columbus]

you called it "quote mining".
That's what's risky.

I did not.
I said that it sounds like quote mining. And it still does. You keep explaining things except for the context of the one line you quoted.
Not that I care all that much. I don't believe much of what politicians say about anything. I wonder why they said it.
Tom

 

[Revoltingest]

I did not.
I said that it sounds like quote mining. And it still does.

I'm sorry....I missed that distinction.

You keep explaining things except for the context of the one line you quoted.
Not that I care all that much. I don't believe much of what politicians say about anything. I wonder why they said it.

The point remains that her competition is no loopier than she.

 

[columbus]

The point remains that her competition is no loopier than she.

I think she is 80% likely to be the successor to Obama. The other 20% is a freakish accident, that is still possible. Your one line quote is not as loopy as what her competition is saying.
She has said loopy things. Flat out lied. She is a politician after all. The question, to me, is not "Has she done this or that"?.
The question is why?
I believe that her schtick is to buoy up the middle class. She will persue that goal with the ruthless methods required in Washington DC, and she is well able. To me, that is better than making Sanders' promises but not being able to keep them.
I learned the difference between promises and delivery by supporting Obama. I wish I had voted for Hillary Clinton the last time around.
Tom

 

[Revoltingest]

I think she is 80% likely to be the successor to Obama. The other 20% is a freakish accident, that is still possible. Your one line quote is not as loopy as what her competition is saying.
She has said loopy things. Flat out lied. She is a politician after all. The question, to me, is not "Has she done this or that"?.
The question is why?
I believe that her schtick is to buoy up the middle class. She will persue that goal with the ruthless methods required in Washington DC, and she is well able. To me, that is better than making Sanders' promises but not being able to keep them.
I learned the difference between promises and delivery by supporting Obama. I wish I had voted for Hillary Clinton the last time around.
Tom

I won't predict who will win.
But I'm glad to see that she isn't the shoe in that the DNC intended.
She's far far to violently hawkish for me to ever want in office.

 

[columbus]

But I'm glad to see that she isn't the shoe in that the DNC intended.
She's far far to violently hawkish for me.

Boy, is she playing you.
While Trump blows up the Republican party by saying what they want to hear, and Sanders sweeps the young "nonvoters" together into a email list, she will keep on marching towards victory.

FWIW, I don't think she is as hawkish as you think. She has had to prove that chicks can be strong on defense. But I believe that she is more pragmatic than her "bomb the sandn***ers 'til the middle East glows at night" competition.
No guarantee on that.
Tom

 

[Revoltingest]

Boy, is she playing you.

Or is she playing you?

While Trump blows up the Republican party by saying what they want to hear, and Sanders sweeps the young "nonvoters" together into a email list, she will keep on marching towards victory.
FWIW, I don't think she is as hawkish as you think. She has had to prove that chicks can be strong on defense. But I believe that she is more pragmatic than her "bomb the sandn***ers 'til the middle East glows at night" competition.
No guarantee on that.
Tom

She's not strong on defense.
She's adventurist on offense, which is entirely different.
She voted for the Iraq war, & for continuing it.
Now she threatens Iran.
IMO she's the most dangerous.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

She has said loopy things. Flat out lied. She is a politician after all. The question, to me, is not "Has she done this or that"?.

All this talk of politicians and lying...it makes me think of Machiavelli's "The Prince," and how much I would totally and utterly despise such a person, but yet also totally understand the whys and that they live in a cut-throat world where a lie is really the least of offenses they could do because the other stuff to do in order to secure power makes me wonder how anyone could ever believe a politician could be a follower of Christ. I would call Hillary a "Princess," but Disney has done far too much to make that term synonymous with a pathetic and weak woman who believes she must have a man, or more specifically the "knight in shining armor" to save her. Rather, instead, we I think Hillary is probably very deserving of being called a politician, but with a capital P.