Hillary won more votes for President

JimmyV

Really?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/clinton-blames-putins-personal-grudge-against-her-for-election-interference/2016/12/16/12f36250-c3be-11e6-8422-eac61c0ef74d_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_clintonrussia-230pm:homepage/story&utm_term=.ad1c40c379bf

Gern Blansten

I don't know why this is such an issue. Pretty unprecedented for a nominee to have to deal with the Russian shit and Comey's bullshit.

JimmyV

Gern Blansten said:

I don't know why this is such an issue. Pretty unprecedented for a nominee to have to deal with the Russian shit and Comey's bullshit.

Pretty unprecedented to have a nominee who is the subject of an active FBI investigation, too.

I don't disagree that this election was unusual, that Comey hurt her, or that Russia may have worked against her. I just don't buy that Comey and Russia were the primary reasons she lost.

HughFreakingDillon

PJfanwillneverleave1 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJfanwillneverleave1 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJfanwillneverleave1 said:

JimmyV said:

All of that said...almost 3 million more Americans voted for the Democratic ticket than voted for Donald Trump.

This is why the democrats lost.
They just repeat garbage over and over again believing it to be true.
Do the Republicans go on and on about how they won the election w/ 3million less votes than Hillary?

This thread.

you have called Donald Trump your Jesus Christ at least twice that I have seen.
you have also admitted that he is a sexual predator and mocked the american voters for voting such a person into office.
you didn't know until about a week ago that you can win the election and lose the popular vote.
you take one statement out of Jimmy's entire intelligent and well-thought-out post and mock it.

you have zero idea what you are talking about, and are doing nothing but trolling.

I took one statement out because that was the only thing I saw that needed attention from my perspective.
The dems are running around yelling fire right now and wondering how this happened.
They are not listening to the right at all telling them a few reasons.
I did know about winning the election but losing the popular vote - and I mock that because it is stupid. What kind of electoral process is that? And honestly I am not saying this to play the opposite game but what if Hillary won the election and Donald Trump won the popular vote, what would happen? Would the dems be silent or the repubs?
And where have I admitted that he is a sexual predator? - if you show me I'll accept, I just don't remember.
So, again just the concept that Hillary won more votes than Donald but is not in the whitehouse is stupid.

PJfanwillneverleave1
PJfanwillneverleave1 Posts: 9,775
December 14 Flag
Yes, they were that bad.
A sexual predator they could not beat.
Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not. Both ideas are overwhelming.
AE
Quote

http://community.pearljam.com/discussion/comment/6384075#Comment_6384075

Not sure what that flag is all about but my post was to point out that their campaign was so bad they couldn't even beat a so called sexual predator. I never said he was.

the "flag" is the button at the top of each post that you can use to report it. I just did a straight copy and paste, hence the word showing up, just like the word quote and post count.

"a sexual predator they could not beat".

try to weasel out of it all you want. it's in black and white.

Gern Blansten

JimmyV said:

Gern Blansten said:

I don't know why this is such an issue. Pretty unprecedented for a nominee to have to deal with the Russian shit and Comey's bullshit.

Pretty unprecedented to have a nominee who is the subject of an active FBI investigation, too.

I don't disagree that this election was unusual, that Comey hurt her, or that Russia may have worked against her. I just don't buy that Comey and Russia were the primary reasons she lost.

Yeah and why? Was it politically motivated?

The Comey letter was the nail in the coffin. She lost the EC by about 77,000 votes. She won the popular vote by almost 3 million votes.

PJ_Soul

JimmyV said:

Really?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/clinton-blames-putins-personal-grudge-against-her-for-election-interference/2016/12/16/12f36250-c3be-11e6-8422-eac61c0ef74d_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_clintonrussia-230pm:homepage/story&utm_term=.ad1c40c379bf

I would not at all be surprised if that is a factor (not the only one oobviously - I think the biggest factor is that Putin simply knows that he can play Trump like a fiddle and knows that Trump and his buddies will serve his purposes well). I don't think Clinton is crazy or paranoid, so she, as Secretary of State, would fully understand the shit that goes on privately (and publicly) between international politicians, especially if she was involved. Hell, the Iraq war was partly a result of GW trying to get back at Saddam Hussien for trying to kill his dad and because he hated him. GW admitted that out loud. No one should ever assume it's above a world leader to make huge moves at least partly because of personal grudges. I bet it happens way more often than we even imagine, considering the personality types who are often world leaders - the egos on them - and considering the personality of Putin in particular ......... Imagine the kinds of grudges that Trump will act on????

JimmyV

Gern Blansten said:

JimmyV said:

Gern Blansten said:

I don't know why this is such an issue. Pretty unprecedented for a nominee to have to deal with the Russian shit and Comey's bullshit.

Pretty unprecedented to have a nominee who is the subject of an active FBI investigation, too.

I don't disagree that this election was unusual, that Comey hurt her, or that Russia may have worked against her. I just don't buy that Comey and Russia were the primary reasons she lost.

Yeah and why? Was it politically motivated?

The Comey letter was the nail in the coffin. She lost the EC by about 77,000 votes. She won the popular vote by almost 3 million votes.

Whether it was politically motivated or not, it was real and it was known. Democrats nominated her anyways. How do they then act surprised and wronged when it blows up in their faces?

Gern Blansten

JimmyV said:

Gern Blansten said:

JimmyV said:

Gern Blansten said:

I don't know why this is such an issue. Pretty unprecedented for a nominee to have to deal with the Russian shit and Comey's bullshit.

Pretty unprecedented to have a nominee who is the subject of an active FBI investigation, too.

I don't disagree that this election was unusual, that Comey hurt her, or that Russia may have worked against her. I just don't buy that Comey and Russia were the primary reasons she lost.

Yeah and why? Was it politically motivated?

The Comey letter was the nail in the coffin. She lost the EC by about 77,000 votes. She won the popular vote by almost 3 million votes.

Whether it was politically motivated or not, it was real and it was known. Democrats nominated her anyways. How do they then act surprised and wronged when it blows up in their faces?

It blew up in their faces because of Comey. The FBI had closed their bullshit investigation months before the election.

Comey's letter came out a week or so before the election right? That was devastating. The session several months before where he said "no reasonable prosecutor would pursue the case" was a plus...not a minus.

HughFreakingDillon

Gern Blansten said:

JimmyV said:

Gern Blansten said:

JimmyV said:

Gern Blansten said:

I don't know why this is such an issue. Pretty unprecedented for a nominee to have to deal with the Russian shit and Comey's bullshit.

Pretty unprecedented to have a nominee who is the subject of an active FBI investigation, too.

I don't disagree that this election was unusual, that Comey hurt her, or that Russia may have worked against her. I just don't buy that Comey and Russia were the primary reasons she lost.

Yeah and why? Was it politically motivated?

The Comey letter was the nail in the coffin. She lost the EC by about 77,000 votes. She won the popular vote by almost 3 million votes.

Whether it was politically motivated or not, it was real and it was known. Democrats nominated her anyways. How do they then act surprised and wronged when it blows up in their faces?

It blew up in their faces because of Comey. The FBI had closed their bullshit investigation months before the election.

Comey's letter came out a week or so before the election right? That was devastating. The session several months before where he said "no reasonable prosecutor would pursue the case" was a plus...not a minus.

I for one cannot believe there were that many people who still hadn't made up their minds by that point that it made a difference. I think she was dead in the water long before anyone knew.

JC29856

HughFreakingDillon said:

Gern Blansten said:

JimmyV said:

Gern Blansten said:

JimmyV said:

Gern Blansten said:

I don't know why this is such an issue. Pretty unprecedented for a nominee to have to deal with the Russian shit and Comey's bullshit.

Pretty unprecedented to have a nominee who is the subject of an active FBI investigation, too.

I don't disagree that this election was unusual, that Comey hurt her, or that Russia may have worked against her. I just don't buy that Comey and Russia were the primary reasons she lost.

Yeah and why? Was it politically motivated?

The Comey letter was the nail in the coffin. She lost the EC by about 77,000 votes. She won the popular vote by almost 3 million votes.

Whether it was politically motivated or not, it was real and it was known. Democrats nominated her anyways. How do they then act surprised and wronged when it blows up in their faces?

It blew up in their faces because of Comey. The FBI had closed their bullshit investigation months before the election.

Comey's letter came out a week or so before the election right? That was devastating. The session several months before where he said "no reasonable prosecutor would pursue the case" was a plus...not a minus.

I for one cannot believe there were that many people who still hadn't made up their minds by that point that it made a difference. I think she was dead in the water long before anyone knew.

And the campaign said it...they released data suggesting that likely voters made up their mind in August.
Hillary: you know i think people a long time ago made up their minds.

PJ_Soul

Gern Blansten said:

JimmyV said:

Gern Blansten said:

JimmyV said:

Gern Blansten said:

I don't know why this is such an issue. Pretty unprecedented for a nominee to have to deal with the Russian shit and Comey's bullshit.

Pretty unprecedented to have a nominee who is the subject of an active FBI investigation, too.

I don't disagree that this election was unusual, that Comey hurt her, or that Russia may have worked against her. I just don't buy that Comey and Russia were the primary reasons she lost.

Yeah and why? Was it politically motivated?

The Comey letter was the nail in the coffin. She lost the EC by about 77,000 votes. She won the popular vote by almost 3 million votes.

Whether it was politically motivated or not, it was real and it was known. Democrats nominated her anyways. How do they then act surprised and wronged when it blows up in their faces?

It blew up in their faces because of Comey. The FBI had closed their bullshit investigation months before the election.

Comey's letter came out a week or so before the election right? That was devastating. The session several months before where he said "no reasonable prosecutor would pursue the case" was a plus...not a minus.

Agreed. I think the right is grossly underestimating the impact that Comey letter had on the election (because that doesn't support their biases).

Gern Blansten

HughFreakingDillon said:

Gern Blansten said:

JimmyV said:

Gern Blansten said:

JimmyV said:

Gern Blansten said:

I don't know why this is such an issue. Pretty unprecedented for a nominee to have to deal with the Russian shit and Comey's bullshit.

Pretty unprecedented to have a nominee who is the subject of an active FBI investigation, too.

I don't disagree that this election was unusual, that Comey hurt her, or that Russia may have worked against her. I just don't buy that Comey and Russia were the primary reasons she lost.

Yeah and why? Was it politically motivated?

The Comey letter was the nail in the coffin. She lost the EC by about 77,000 votes. She won the popular vote by almost 3 million votes.

Whether it was politically motivated or not, it was real and it was known. Democrats nominated her anyways. How do they then act surprised and wronged when it blows up in their faces?

It blew up in their faces because of Comey. The FBI had closed their bullshit investigation months before the election.

Comey's letter came out a week or so before the election right? That was devastating. The session several months before where he said "no reasonable prosecutor would pursue the case" was a plus...not a minus.

I for one cannot believe there were that many people who still hadn't made up their minds by that point that it made a difference. I think she was dead in the water long before anyone knew.

I think Comey's letter served two purposes

1. Energize the anti-Clinton vote....piss people off who might have thought Trump didn't have a chance and possibly give me more of a chance
2. Take some momentum away from the pro Clinton vote.

JimmyV

Gern Blansten said:

JimmyV said:

Gern Blansten said:

JimmyV said:

Gern Blansten said:

I don't know why this is such an issue. Pretty unprecedented for a nominee to have to deal with the Russian shit and Comey's bullshit.

Pretty unprecedented to have a nominee who is the subject of an active FBI investigation, too.

I don't disagree that this election was unusual, that Comey hurt her, or that Russia may have worked against her. I just don't buy that Comey and Russia were the primary reasons she lost.

Yeah and why? Was it politically motivated?

The Comey letter was the nail in the coffin. She lost the EC by about 77,000 votes. She won the popular vote by almost 3 million votes.

Whether it was politically motivated or not, it was real and it was known. Democrats nominated her anyways. How do they then act surprised and wronged when it blows up in their faces?

It blew up in their faces because of Comey. The FBI had closed their bullshit investigation months before the election.

Comey's letter came out a week or so before the election right? That was devastating. The session several months before where he said "no reasonable prosecutor would pursue the case" was a plus...not a minus.

But if there's no investigation it can't blow up in their faces. This is the opposite of the chicken and the egg. We know which came first.

And, yes, he did say no reasonable prosecutor would pursue case. Which is why I kinda doubt he was trying to screw her over. Otherwise why not just recommend charges?

Gern Blansten

JimmyV said:

Gern Blansten said:

JimmyV said:

Gern Blansten said:

JimmyV said:

Gern Blansten said:

I don't know why this is such an issue. Pretty unprecedented for a nominee to have to deal with the Russian shit and Comey's bullshit.

Pretty unprecedented to have a nominee who is the subject of an active FBI investigation, too.

I don't disagree that this election was unusual, that Comey hurt her, or that Russia may have worked against her. I just don't buy that Comey and Russia were the primary reasons she lost.

Yeah and why? Was it politically motivated?

The Comey letter was the nail in the coffin. She lost the EC by about 77,000 votes. She won the popular vote by almost 3 million votes.

Whether it was politically motivated or not, it was real and it was known. Democrats nominated her anyways. How do they then act surprised and wronged when it blows up in their faces?

It blew up in their faces because of Comey. The FBI had closed their bullshit investigation months before the election.

Comey's letter came out a week or so before the election right? That was devastating. The session several months before where he said "no reasonable prosecutor would pursue the case" was a plus...not a minus.

But if there's no investigation it can't blow up in their faces. This is the opposite of the chicken and the egg. We know which came first.

And, yes, he did say no reasonable prosecutor would pursue case. Which is why I kinda doubt he was trying to screw her over. Otherwise why not just recommend charges?

He created the idea that she might still be prosecuted...the "oh hey we just found some more shit let's open this back up" scenario

then a few days later "still nothing here"

That's fucked up. He was pushed to write that initial letter for a reason. That's plain as day.

JC29856

And the polls? What effect did they have on luke warm Hilliary supportors or fence sitters?

JimmyV

Gern Blansten said:

JimmyV said:

Gern Blansten said:

JimmyV said:

Gern Blansten said:

JimmyV said:

Gern Blansten said:

I don't know why this is such an issue. Pretty unprecedented for a nominee to have to deal with the Russian shit and Comey's bullshit.

Pretty unprecedented to have a nominee who is the subject of an active FBI investigation, too.

I don't disagree that this election was unusual, that Comey hurt her, or that Russia may have worked against her. I just don't buy that Comey and Russia were the primary reasons she lost.

Yeah and why? Was it politically motivated?

The Comey letter was the nail in the coffin. She lost the EC by about 77,000 votes. She won the popular vote by almost 3 million votes.

Whether it was politically motivated or not, it was real and it was known. Democrats nominated her anyways. How do they then act surprised and wronged when it blows up in their faces?

It blew up in their faces because of Comey. The FBI had closed their bullshit investigation months before the election.

Comey's letter came out a week or so before the election right? That was devastating. The session several months before where he said "no reasonable prosecutor would pursue the case" was a plus...not a minus.

But if there's no investigation it can't blow up in their faces. This is the opposite of the chicken and the egg. We know which came first.

And, yes, he did say no reasonable prosecutor would pursue case. Which is why I kinda doubt he was trying to screw her over. Otherwise why not just recommend charges?

He created the idea that she might still be prosecuted...the "oh hey we just found some more shit let's open this back up" scenario

then a few days later "still nothing here"

That's fucked up. He was pushed to write that initial letter for a reason. That's plain as day.

Maybe. I don't understand why he didn't just recommend charges in the first place then.

PJ_Soul

JimmyV said:

Gern Blansten said:

JimmyV said:

Gern Blansten said:

JimmyV said:

Gern Blansten said:

JimmyV said:

Gern Blansten said:

I don't know why this is such an issue. Pretty unprecedented for a nominee to have to deal with the Russian shit and Comey's bullshit.

Pretty unprecedented to have a nominee who is the subject of an active FBI investigation, too.

I don't disagree that this election was unusual, that Comey hurt her, or that Russia may have worked against her. I just don't buy that Comey and Russia were the primary reasons she lost.

Yeah and why? Was it politically motivated?

The Comey letter was the nail in the coffin. She lost the EC by about 77,000 votes. She won the popular vote by almost 3 million votes.

Whether it was politically motivated or not, it was real and it was known. Democrats nominated her anyways. How do they then act surprised and wronged when it blows up in their faces?

It blew up in their faces because of Comey. The FBI had closed their bullshit investigation months before the election.

Comey's letter came out a week or so before the election right? That was devastating. The session several months before where he said "no reasonable prosecutor would pursue the case" was a plus...not a minus.

But if there's no investigation it can't blow up in their faces. This is the opposite of the chicken and the egg. We know which came first.

And, yes, he did say no reasonable prosecutor would pursue case. Which is why I kinda doubt he was trying to screw her over. Otherwise why not just recommend charges?

He created the idea that she might still be prosecuted...the "oh hey we just found some more shit let's open this back up" scenario

then a few days later "still nothing here"

That's fucked up. He was pushed to write that initial letter for a reason. That's plain as day.

Maybe. I don't understand why he didn't just recommend charges in the first place then.

Charges for what exactly? I never saw anything that actually seemed to justify charges. Isn't that the issue??

Gern Blansten

JimmyV said:

Gern Blansten said:

JimmyV said:

Gern Blansten said:

JimmyV said:

Gern Blansten said:

JimmyV said:

Gern Blansten said:

I don't know why this is such an issue. Pretty unprecedented for a nominee to have to deal with the Russian shit and Comey's bullshit.

Pretty unprecedented to have a nominee who is the subject of an active FBI investigation, too.

I don't disagree that this election was unusual, that Comey hurt her, or that Russia may have worked against her. I just don't buy that Comey and Russia were the primary reasons she lost.

Yeah and why? Was it politically motivated?

The Comey letter was the nail in the coffin. She lost the EC by about 77,000 votes. She won the popular vote by almost 3 million votes.

Whether it was politically motivated or not, it was real and it was known. Democrats nominated her anyways. How do they then act surprised and wronged when it blows up in their faces?

It blew up in their faces because of Comey. The FBI had closed their bullshit investigation months before the election.

Comey's letter came out a week or so before the election right? That was devastating. The session several months before where he said "no reasonable prosecutor would pursue the case" was a plus...not a minus.

But if there's no investigation it can't blow up in their faces. This is the opposite of the chicken and the egg. We know which came first.

And, yes, he did say no reasonable prosecutor would pursue case. Which is why I kinda doubt he was trying to screw her over. Otherwise why not just recommend charges?

He created the idea that she might still be prosecuted...the "oh hey we just found some more shit let's open this back up" scenario

then a few days later "still nothing here"

That's fucked up. He was pushed to write that initial letter for a reason. That's plain as day.

Maybe. I don't understand why he didn't just recommend charges in the first place then.

Because there was nothing there. The emails that contained "classified info" (of which there were like four) had such worthless information in them that he couldn't possibly recommend any censure or charges.....which he didn't.

He did his best with the comment about "reckless disregard" but that comment was referring to the private server....the server that didn't get hacked. The server that was set up for a former POTUS to have in his home.

Gern Blansten

This email narrative is about to blow up in Trump's face over Flynn. That guy REALLY fucked up with classified information.

JimmyV

PJ_Soul said:

JimmyV said:

Gern Blansten said:

JimmyV said:

Gern Blansten said:

JimmyV said:

Gern Blansten said:

JimmyV said:

Gern Blansten said:

I don't know why this is such an issue. Pretty unprecedented for a nominee to have to deal with the Russian shit and Comey's bullshit.

Pretty unprecedented to have a nominee who is the subject of an active FBI investigation, too.

I don't disagree that this election was unusual, that Comey hurt her, or that Russia may have worked against her. I just don't buy that Comey and Russia were the primary reasons she lost.

Yeah and why? Was it politically motivated?

The Comey letter was the nail in the coffin. She lost the EC by about 77,000 votes. She won the popular vote by almost 3 million votes.

Whether it was politically motivated or not, it was real and it was known. Democrats nominated her anyways. How do they then act surprised and wronged when it blows up in their faces?

It blew up in their faces because of Comey. The FBI had closed their bullshit investigation months before the election.

Comey's letter came out a week or so before the election right? That was devastating. The session several months before where he said "no reasonable prosecutor would pursue the case" was a plus...not a minus.

But if there's no investigation it can't blow up in their faces. This is the opposite of the chicken and the egg. We know which came first.

And, yes, he did say no reasonable prosecutor would pursue case. Which is why I kinda doubt he was trying to screw her over. Otherwise why not just recommend charges?

He created the idea that she might still be prosecuted...the "oh hey we just found some more shit let's open this back up" scenario

then a few days later "still nothing here"

That's fucked up. He was pushed to write that initial letter for a reason. That's plain as day.

Maybe. I don't understand why he didn't just recommend charges in the first place then.

Charges for what exactly? I never saw anything that actually seemed to justify charges. Isn't that the issue??

Believe me, the last thing I want to do this afternoon is relitigate the FBI investigation. I don't think there was anything that justified charges either. But there was classified info on a private server. Not much but it was there. What I'm saying is if Comey wanted to screw her, reasonable prosecution or not, why not just recommend charges when he had the chance? Force the justice department to either follow through and prosecute or look partisan for overruling the FBI. Why clear her? So when a new trove of emails appears and he notifies congress about them, I'm not as convinced as most that he was out to get Clinton.