# Hillary's lead over Sanders "nearly vanishes". **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [January 11, 2016, 5:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillarys-lead-over-sanders-nearly-vanishes/742833 "2016-01-11T17:48:57Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 12
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2016, 10:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillarys-lead-over-sanders-nearly-vanishes/742833/221 "2016-01-19T22:23:00Z")
> [@FightMyIgnorance](#): > > I think he’s trying to tone down the left wing rhetoric, because as nice as all that is, I think he’s genuinely trying to win this thing. He’s even turned up the dial on attacks on Clinton, granted he’s not exactly running a Rove-esque ad campaign, but still. I think that’s right. It is reminiscent of the classic '70s Robert Redford film, _The Candidate_. Redford’s titular character starts out just being a “real”, no-compromise, no-BS progressive, but as he starts to think he might actually win, in creep the compromises and hedging. Another example of this came on another talking heads show this past Sunday, in this case _Meet the Press:_ > [@](#): > > SENATOR BERNIE SANDERS: Look, what we saw here in Charleston is a tragedy of unspeakable dimensions. A guy sits in prayer with people, then he takes out a gun and shoots nine people. I hope we don’t have to politicize that issue. Wow. :eek: That last line sounds exactly like the kind of minimizing rhetoric Republicans use in reaction to mass shootings. ---
**Author:** ![ISiddiqui](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/97f17d/32.png) [@ISiddiqui](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ISiddiqui)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2016, 10:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillarys-lead-over-sanders-nearly-vanishes/742833/222 "2016-01-19T22:24:59Z")
> [@FightMyIgnorance](#): > > Of course, don’t misconstrue my words as an unwillingness to compromise at all. What I’m saying is, there are certain articles that I hold to be very important, and when even those are compromised for the sake of “winning”, I stop feeling as though I’ve “won”. That’s part of living in a democracy. I mean I sometimes feel as if some of the Bernie-folks I hear referring to Hillary Clinton as a Republican (which is always somewhat amusing to actual Republicans - who consider her a fairly leftist politician) are similar to the Tea Party folks in that their list of “important articles that shouldn’t be compromised” is a very, very lengthy list. > [@](#): > > As for Cruz, W. was the guy “you wanted to have a beer with.” He was perceived as being personable. > > Cruz is not that. His own fellow Tea Party compatriots dislike him, how is he going to win over an independent (to say nothing of his ideological extremism)? That’s why I referenced Nixon as well. ---
**Author:** ![davidm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/davidm/32/225_2.png) [@davidm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/davidm)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2016, 10:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillarys-lead-over-sanders-nearly-vanishes/742833/223 "2016-01-19T22:49:04Z")
CNN/WMUR Poll: Sanders trouncing Clinton in New Hampshire > **[CNN/WMUR Poll: Sanders trouncing Clinton in New Hampshire | CNN Politics](https://www.cnn.com/2016/01/19/politics/new-hampshire-cnn-wmur-poll-democrats/)** > > Bernie Sanders’ lead over Hillary Clinton in New Hampshire is on the rise, with the Vermont senator leading the former secretary of state by 27 points, 60% to 33%, a new CNN/WMUR poll has found. > [@](#): > > (CNN)Bernie Sanders’ lead over Hillary Clinton in New Hampshire is on the rise, with the Vermont senator leading the former secretary of state by 27 points, 60% to 33%, a new CNN/WMUR poll has found. The Poll: [http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/19/politics/new-hampshire-poll-democrats-full-results/index.html](http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/19/politics/new-hampshire-poll-democrats-full-results/index.html) ---
**Author:** ![botsgotme](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/91b2a8/32.png) [@botsgotme](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/botsgotme)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2016, 11:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillarys-lead-over-sanders-nearly-vanishes/742833/224 "2016-01-19T23:32:33Z")
> [@davidm](#): > > CNN/WMUR Poll: Sanders trouncing Clinton in New Hampshire > [http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/19/politics/new-hampshire-cnn-wmur-poll-democrats/](http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/19/politics/new-hampshire-cnn-wmur-poll-democrats/) > > The Poll: [http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/19/politics/new-hampshire-poll-democrats-full-results/index.html](http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/19/politics/new-hampshire-poll-democrats-full-results/index.html) I’m loving this…I want to see a Trump-Sanders showdown.:😃 ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2016, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillarys-lead-over-sanders-nearly-vanishes/742833/225 "2016-01-20T17:22:05Z")
> [@botsgotme](#): > > I want to see a Trump-Sanders showdown.:😃 Why do you hate America? 🙂 Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2016, 4:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillarys-lead-over-sanders-nearly-vanishes/742833/226 "2016-01-21T04:01:04Z")
Going after an Obama appointee and accusing him of “smearing” you isn’t going to help, Hillary: [http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/article55628755.html](http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/article55628755.html) > [@](#): > > WASHINGTON > > Hillary Clinton’s spokesman accused the Intelligence Community Inspector General Wednesday of working with Republicans to attack the Democratic presidential front-runner. > > “I think this was a very coordinated leak,” Brian Fallon said on CNN. “Two months ago there was a…report that directly challenged the finding of this inspector general, and I don’t think he liked that very much. So I think that he put two Republican senators up to sending him a letter so that he would have an excuse to resurface the same allegations he made back in the summer that have been discredited.” > > The comments came after Inspector General Charles McCullough III told senators that he believes at least several dozen of emails Clinton sent and received while she was secretary of state contained classified material at the highest levels, according to a letter obtained by McClatchy. > > Read more here: [http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/article55628755.html#storylink=cpy](http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/article55628755.html#storylink=cpy) ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2016, 4:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillarys-lead-over-sanders-nearly-vanishes/742833/227 "2016-01-21T04:03:53Z")
And the NY Times reports that women are conflicted over Clinton’s role in discrediting women who accused her husband of sexual misconduct. > **[’90s Scandals Threaten to Erode Hillary Clinton’s Strength With Women...](https://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/21/us/politics/90s-scandals-threaten-to-erode-hillary-clintons-strength-with-women.html?_r=0)** > > Women are struggling to reconcile Mrs. Clinton’s championing of women’s issues with reports of her previous efforts to undercut those who accused her husband of sexual misconduct. Shouldn’t have led with your chin with that stupid tweet. ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2016, 4:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillarys-lead-over-sanders-nearly-vanishes/742833/228 "2016-01-21T04:04:02Z")
I dunno…not sure “Obama appointee” automatically means anything. Wasn’t Ken Starr indirectly a Clinton appointee in a way? ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2016, 4:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillarys-lead-over-sanders-nearly-vanishes/742833/229 "2016-01-21T04:07:57Z")
Yes, but Starr had a history as a Republican activist. Which is expected, a President is supposed to appoint someone adversarial when appointing a special prosecutor or else it’s not credible. McCullough has no history of partisanship. Nor is his contention even all that controversial. Hillary Clinton is moving the goalposts, saying nothing she had on her server was marked classified. Which is true. But she’s the Secretary of State, she should know when she’s dealing with classified information, especially if it’s top secret. Of course, if she’d used a government account, none of this would have been an issue. ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2016, 4:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillarys-lead-over-sanders-nearly-vanishes/742833/230 "2016-01-21T04:11:12Z")
If it’s true that it wasn’t marked classified, then it is a nonissue. And especially if it’s true that the item in question is just a NYT story. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2016, 6:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillarys-lead-over-sanders-nearly-vanishes/742833/231 "2016-01-21T06:09:10Z")
However, there are some things which are automatically classified, and it’s the Secretary’s job to know. She was heavily briefed on this when taking office. If it was just a matter of “Is it marked classified?” then that briefing could have simply been a post-it on her computer. And anyone else could use that as a defense in court. “Sure I told a reporter about a secret missile program, but I didn’t get the info from a document marked “classified”!” Hillary Clinton has a habit of making really stupid defenses of her actions on the assumption that people likely to vote for her are not that bright. Her defense of her actions against Bill accusers? “That was the 90s”. Oh, well that settles that then. ---
**Author:** ![Gatopescado](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gatopescado/32/5711_2.png) [@Gatopescado](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gatopescado)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2016, 7:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillarys-lead-over-sanders-nearly-vanishes/742833/232 "2016-01-21T07:16:51Z")
If Bernie beats her, I can almost see her melting into the floor while shouting, “What a World!”. It’s a Wonderful Wizard, indeed! ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2016, 8:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillarys-lead-over-sanders-nearly-vanishes/742833/233 "2016-01-21T08:21:58Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > However, there are some things which are automatically classified, and it’s the Secretary’s job to know. She was heavily briefed on this when taking office. If it was just a matter of “Is it marked classified?” then that briefing could have simply been a post-it on her computer. And anyone else could use that as a defense in court. “Sure I told a reporter about a secret missile program, but I didn’t get the info from a document marked “classified”!” > > Hillary Clinton has a habit of making really stupid defenses of her actions on the assumption that people likely to vote for her are not that bright. Her defense of her actions against Bill accusers? “That was the 90s”. Oh, well that settles that then. The habit of many on the right to fall on their face by being trip on the many exaggerations launched against Clinton never ceases to amaze me. That then many do learn how asinine are those exaggerations is what leads many to realize that Clinton is not making the stupid defense, it is actually the stupid offense from outfits like FOX that makes many to repeat reheated baloney. > **["Nuclear Bombshell": Right-Wing Media Hype Old, Disputed Claim That Clinton's...](https://www.mediamatters.org/nbc/nuclear-bombshell-right-wing-media-hype-old-disputed-claim-clintons-emails-mentioned-classified)** > > Right-wing media are hyping a letter from the intelligence community's inspector general claiming some of Hillary Clinton's emails from her time as secretary of state contained information classified above "top secret." However, the development... > [@](#): > > Right-wing media are hyping a letter from the intelligence community’s inspector general claiming some of Hillary Clinton’s emails from her time as secretary of state contained information classified above “top secret.” However, the development that Clinton’s emails reportedly mention widely-known public information about the country’s drone operation was already covered by the media in 2015. > [@](#): > > But Politico And [NBCNews.com](http://NBCNews.com) Note Emails In Question May Relate To Widely-Known Public Information About U.S. Drone Program > > Politico: Government Official Suggests “Some Or All” Of Clinton Emails Designated SAP Referenced Public Information About U.S. Drone Strikes. A government official told Politico “some or all of the emails deemed to implicate ‘special access programs’ related to U.S. drone strikes” and explained the information was “‘not obtained through a classified product,’” although “the intelligence community considers information about classified operations to be classified even if it appears in news reports or is apparent to eyewitnesses on the ground”: > > > [@](#): > > > > The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said some or all of the emails deemed to implicate “special access programs” related to U.S. drone strikes. Those who sent the emails were not involved in directing or approving the strikes, but responded to the fallout from them, the official said. > > > > ``` > > The information in the emails "was not obtained through a classified product, but is considered 'per se' classified" because it pertains to drones, the official added. The U.S. treats drone operations conducted by the CIA as classified, even though in a 2012 internet chat Presidential Barack Obama acknowledged U.S.-directed drone strikes in Pakistan. > > > > The source noted that the intelligence community considers information about classified operations to be classified even if it appears in news reports or is apparent to eyewitnesses on the ground. For example, U.S. officials with security clearances have been warned not to access classified information leaked to WikiLeaks and published in the New York Times. > > > > "Even though things are in the public domain, they still retain their classification level," the official said. "The ICIG maintains its position that it's still 'codeword' classified." [Politico, 1/19/16] > > > > ``` ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2016, 2:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillarys-lead-over-sanders-nearly-vanishes/742833/234 "2016-01-21T14:59:48Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > Two big reasons are that (1) we subsidize Europe’s social programs by being their military force . . . No one really **needs** American military protection any more, not even the South Koreans. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2016, 5:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillarys-lead-over-sanders-nearly-vanishes/742833/235 "2016-01-21T17:40:30Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > No one really **needs** American military protection any more, not even the South Koreans. That’s a normative judgement. I’m making a prescriptive one. However irrational, Europe will spend more if the US spends substantially less. ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2016, 5:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillarys-lead-over-sanders-nearly-vanishes/742833/236 "2016-01-21T17:42:29Z")
How do you figure, **BG**? ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2016, 6:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillarys-lead-over-sanders-nearly-vanishes/742833/237 "2016-01-21T18:12:22Z")
> [@davidm](#): > > CNN/WMUR Poll: Sanders trouncing Clinton in New Hampshire > [http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/19/politics/new-hampshire-cnn-wmur-poll-democrats/](http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/19/politics/new-hampshire-cnn-wmur-poll-democrats/) > > The Poll: [http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/19/politics/new-hampshire-poll-democrats-full-results/index.html](http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/19/politics/new-hampshire-poll-democrats-full-results/index.html) But … but … the pro-Hillary camp keeps saying that it doesn’t matter, that nothing Sanders can do, including perhaps winning the primaries in all 50 states, will keep Hillary from winning. Because she’s magical, ya’ll … she’s a Clinton! ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2016, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillarys-lead-over-sanders-nearly-vanishes/742833/238 "2016-01-21T18:17:18Z")
> [@Politico](#): > > The source noted that the intelligence community considers information about classified operations to be classified even if it appears in news reports or is apparent to eyewitnesses on the ground. For example, U.S. officials with security clearances have been warned not to access classified information leaked to WikiLeaks and published in the New York Times. > > “Even though things are in the public domain, they still retain their classification level,” the official said. “The ICIG maintains its position that it’s still ‘codeword’ classified.” So Clinton is being hounded by security classifications that utterly fail a simple common sense test? Pathetic, shows how far up its own ass our security apparatus is. ---
**Author:** ![Fenris](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fenris/32/498_2.png) [@Fenris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fenris)\ **Post date:** [January 22, 2016, 12:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillarys-lead-over-sanders-nearly-vanishes/742833/239 "2016-01-22T00:56:43Z")
I wonder why Hillary felt the need to lie about all the stuff she deleted. Remember back when the scandal first started and she said that the her secret “private” emails were > [@Hillary](#): > > “e-mails about planning Chelsea’s wedding or my mother’s funeral arrangements, condolence notes to friends as well as yoga routines, family vacations, the other things you typically find in inboxes” Yeah, me too. Amazing how much non-yoga email they’re finding. She is such a lying sack of shit that if it comes down to her or Trump, I’ll sit out my first election in like 40 years. I could hold my nose and vote for Bernie over Trump\*, but if it’s Hillary or Trump, the only rational choice is “None of the above” I hate this election cycle. \*I disagree with just about everything Bernie stands for, but he’s neither a pathological liar like Hillary or just flat-out brain-damaged crazy like Trump. Which puts him about 1000 points higher than either of them. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [January 22, 2016, 1:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillarys-lead-over-sanders-nearly-vanishes/742833/240 "2016-01-22T01:03:40Z")
Where are you getting the information that the emails containing putatively classified info were among the ones Clinton deleted instead of turning over as work-related? That seems plainly wrong. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillarys-lead-over-sanders-nearly-vanishes/742833.md?page=11) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillarys-lead-over-sanders-nearly-vanishes/742833.md?page=13)