The Trump pictures are annoying enough in the Trump thread, can they stay out of this thread? I'm not sure why we need so many photos - most people here can read, can't they?
The Trump pictures are annoying enough in the Trump thread, can they stay out of this thread? I'm not sure why we need so many photos - most people here can read, can't they?
Thank you. No more pictures here. We all know what they look like. You can troll the trump thread all you want with Trump pics. Leave then out of here.
will myself to find a home, a home within myself we will find a way, we will find our place
The Trump pictures are annoying enough in the Trump thread, can they stay out of this thread? I'm not sure why we need so many photos - most people here can read, can't they?
Thank you. No more pictures here. We all know what they look like. You can troll the trump thread all you want with Trump pics. Leave then out of here.
But isn't this thread open for discussion whether Hillary should or shouldn't be POTUS? Or is this a rah, rah thread for Hillary only?
Kaine is a good albeit irrelevant choice. The story is already set. Nobody likes Hillary and events around the world will not play in her favour. People want change. The questions is whether Trump can convince people to take the plunge. I have no idea whether his rust belt strategy will work but it's his election to lose. There is not much Hillary can do.
You're correct that her VP pick is irrelevant. But not for the reason you think. Clinton could have picked OJ Simpson and she will still beat the donald. He has no chance.
will myself to find a home, a home within myself we will find a way, we will find our place
Kaine is a good albeit irrelevant choice. The story is already set. Nobody likes Hillary and events around the world will not play in her favour. People want change. The questions is whether Trump can convince people to take the plunge. I have no idea whether his rust belt strategy will work but it's his election to lose. There is not much Hillary can do.
Except implement the Obama county by county data and get out to vote strategy in specific areas. Not to mention she has basically the same team.
Hillary wins if she gets Obama voters out. Has nothing to do with anything else
0
Options
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 41,017
You're correct that her VP pick is irrelevant. But not for the reason you think. Clinton could have picked OJ Simpson and she will still beat the donald. He has no chance.
Totally agree. He hasn't got a chance. It's all for ego and show. HRC is a shoe in and a Big Foot shoe at that.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
Kaine is a good albeit irrelevant choice. The story is already set. Nobody likes Hillary and events around the world will not play in her favour. People want change. The questions is whether Trump can convince people to take the plunge. I have no idea whether his rust belt strategy will work but it's his election to lose. There is not much Hillary can do.
Except implement the Obama county by county data and get out to vote strategy in specific areas. Not to mention she has basically the same team.
Hillary wins if she gets Obama voters out. Has nothing to do with anything else
Yes. This is absolutely true as well. This is where the question of the "enthusiasm gap" comes into play. Hillary does not generate any. Certainly nowhere near what Obama did. So can she get the Obama coalition, who all claim to still want change, to pull the lever for more of the same.
You're correct that her VP pick is irrelevant. But not for the reason you think. Clinton could have picked OJ Simpson and she will still beat the donald. He has no chance.
That would be a very dangerous way for the campaign to behave.
Kaine is a good albeit irrelevant choice. The story is already set. Nobody likes Hillary and events around the world will not play in her favour. People want change. The questions is whether Trump can convince people to take the plunge. I have no idea whether his rust belt strategy will work but it's his election to lose. There is not much Hillary can do.
Except implement the Obama county by county data and get out to vote strategy in specific areas. Not to mention she has basically the same team.
Hillary wins if she gets Obama voters out. Has nothing to do with anything else
Yes. This is absolutely true as well. This is where the question of the "enthusiasm gap" comes into play. Hillary does not generate any. Certainly nowhere near what Obama did. So can she get the Obama coalition, who all claim to still want change, to pull the lever for more of the same.
spot on. i am a prime example of someone who pulled the lever twice, and is not the least bit enthusiastic about the prospects of pulling it again for H->
Kaine is the exact pick that Tony Soprano would make for a VP. An unknown without baggage who will be a lap dog.
No way in hell would a sociopath pick Warren (also, Clinton is trying to win this election as a ... one moment as i engage the caps lock button ... A CHAMPION OF WOMEN'S EQUALITY)
This article wasn't completely clear (or I read it too fast). It appears that it is 'outing' the names of the people with whom she exchanged emails. But it isn't saying that these are email threads that the FBI investigation missed. Are you sure the 'news' here isn't just the recipients? Or is this newspaper claiming it found emails not evaluated by the FBI?
Wiki leaks, Vice news - all ignored by mainstream media. All of the Hillary supporters, this stuff doesn't bother you that she is squashing this shit? Don't you think the public has a right to know?
Say at your job you were going for a promotion, as well as other employees there, but then soon found out you never had a chance. You tried telling people what was happening and they acted like you were bitter and jealous. The deck was stacked against you and you were never going to be allowed to thrive. Doesn't seem very democratic to me. Would you continue to work there?
The email conspiracy is dead. Yes, trump will pounce on it. But people's opinion are already set, for the most part. I don't see anyone that was considering voting for Clinton not voting for her because trump is going to try to keep the email scandal alive.
will myself to find a home, a home within myself we will find a way, we will find our place
The email conspiracy is dead. Yes, trump will pounce on it. But people's opinion are already set, for the most part. I don't see anyone that was considering voting for Clinton not voting for her because trump is going to try to keep the email scandal alive.
I disagree that Trump will pounce... I'm still looking for the 'breaking news' in this article.
Wiki leaks, Vice news - all ignored by mainstream media. All of the Hillary supporters, this stuff doesn't bother you that she is squashing this shit? Don't you think the public has a right to know?
Say at your job you were going for a promotion, as well as other employees there, but then soon found out you never had a chance. You tried telling people what was happening and they acted like you were bitter and jealous. The deck was stacked against you and you were never going to be allowed to thrive. Doesn't seem very democratic to me. Would you continue to work there?
It was in The Hill, Politico, and Huffington Post to start.
Second, a business is not a democracy. People in the company don't have equal votes as to who gets promoted or not promoted, so not a great example.
Third, I don't think there is much debate that the DNC establishment wanted HRC to win. But that doesn't mean she didn't win. She gained more votes and pledges. I'm not sure what HRC is 'squashing' here? Please expand. And you can't use DNC and HRC campaign interchangeably. They are not the same people.
The email conspiracy is dead. Yes, trump will pounce on it. But people's opinion are already set, for the most part. I don't see anyone that was considering voting for Clinton not voting for her because trump is going to try to keep the email scandal alive.
very true. while my choice is not made yet, the email nonsense will not be a factor in deciding.
I'm talking about mainstream media on TV where the average person gets their news. Not websites that are mostly for political junkies, who quite frankly already knew this. So the DNC is supposed to be a fair and unbiased committee helping all nominees equally. That clearly didn't happen.
You'll have to explain to me what is democratic about sending people on TV and other news outlets to demonize one of your parties candidates. Because that is exactly what happens. I thought America was about getting a fair shake. Whether it be in politics or your job.
After all this the fact that you think Hillary and the DNC are separate entities is laughable.
Kaine is a good albeit irrelevant choice. The story is already set. Nobody likes Hillary and events around the world will not play in her favour. People want change. The questions is whether Trump can convince people to take the plunge. I have no idea whether his rust belt strategy will work but it's his election to lose. There is not much Hillary can do.
Except implement the Obama county by county data and get out to vote strategy in specific areas. Not to mention she has basically the same team.
Hillary wins if she gets Obama voters out. Has nothing to do with anything else
Yes. This is absolutely true as well. This is where the question of the "enthusiasm gap" comes into play. Hillary does not generate any. Certainly nowhere near what Obama did. So can she get the Obama coalition, who all claim to still want change, to pull the lever for more of the same.
spot on. i am a prime example of someone who pulled the lever twice, and is not the least bit enthusiastic about the prospects of pulling it again for H->
Same here. I pulled it twice, however there is zero chance that I will pull it for Clinton. It's either the Green party, write in a candidate, or vote for Trump.
I'm talking about mainstream media on TV where the average person gets their news. Not websites that are mostly for political junkies, who quite frankly already knew this. So the DNC is supposed to be a fair and unbiased committee helping all nominees equally. That clearly didn't happen.
You'll have to explain to me what is democratic about sending people on TV and other news outlets to demonize one of your parties candidates. Because that is exactly what happens. I thought America was about getting a fair shake. Whether it be in politics or your job.
After all this the fact that you think Hillary and the DNC are separate entities is laughable.
All of it adds up to much less discomfort than the thought of a Trump presidency for many of us progressives.
Comments
we will find a way, we will find our place
Or is this a rah, rah thread for Hillary only?
we will find a way, we will find our place
That is not the way to talk to someone.
Don't make it personal.
we will find a way, we will find our place
Hillary wins if she gets Obama voters out. Has nothing to do with anything else
And now, we resume our regularly scheduled show... Totally agree. He hasn't got a chance. It's all for ego and show. HRC is a shoe in and a Big Foot shoe at that.
we will find a way, we will find our place
No way in hell would a sociopath pick Warren (also, Clinton is trying to win this election as a ... one moment as i engage the caps lock button ... A CHAMPION OF WOMEN'S EQUALITY)
SOCIOPATH VS. LUNATIC CLOWN
https://news.vice.com/article/exclusive-hillary-clinton-exchanged-classified-emails-on-private-server-with-three-aides
Say at your job you were going for a promotion, as well as other employees there, but then soon found out you never had a chance. You tried telling people what was happening and they acted like you were bitter and jealous. The deck was stacked against you and you were never going to be allowed to thrive. Doesn't seem very democratic to me. Would you continue to work there?
we will find a way, we will find our place
Second, a business is not a democracy. People in the company don't have equal votes as to who gets promoted or not promoted, so not a great example.
Third, I don't think there is much debate that the DNC establishment wanted HRC to win. But that doesn't mean she didn't win. She gained more votes and pledges. I'm not sure what HRC is 'squashing' here? Please expand. And you can't use DNC and HRC campaign interchangeably. They are not the same people.
You'll have to explain to me what is democratic about sending people on TV and other news outlets to demonize one of your parties candidates. Because that is exactly what happens. I thought America was about getting a fair shake. Whether it be in politics or your job.
After all this the fact that you think Hillary and the DNC are separate entities is laughable.
very simple