I don’t think I posted very many negative things about Hillary prior to the revelation about Debbie Wasserman Schultz. This is not the result of some long Republican campaign to get me to hate Hillary. Its the result of much more recent events.
I don’t think I agree with anything that GWD has to say. This hijack would die if people would stop posting bullshit trying to exonerate Hillary for her cheating or pretending that the popular vote means a goddam thing. But the Ready For Hillary crowd just can’t let it go. They think Hillary the cheater is the one that somehow got cheated. By the Russians. Who hacked embarrassing emails about her cheating, the DNC bias and her duplicity evident in her paid speeches to banks.
In what way am I pretending that? There are none so blind as those who will not see.
So lets say that Russia hacked the Trump campaign and revealed FACTS that were embarrassing to Trump. Lets say those hacks revealed that the hacks revealed that Trump got the debate questions ahead of time. I would fucking choke if the “ready for Hillary” crowd wouldn’t overlook the source of those facts and merely point to the embarassing fact itself. And rightly so because what matters is those facts, not the source.
How is revealing the truth an assault on the institution of our democracy (I’m assuming you’re talking about our democracy and not the DNC email servers).
OMFG. You think intelligence, hard word and competence is what makes someone a good candidate? I can point to thousands of people that live within 50 miles of DC that are smarter, harder working and more competent than Hillary but none of them could get elected, fucking think tanks are full of people smarter, harder working and more competent than her. Same for lobbying and law firms in the area. Same for the senior executive service in the bureaucracy. What makes a good candidate is the ability to get elected. Hillary is shitty at that. That makes her a shitty candidate. Who gives a shit if the reason she is unelectable is because the Republicans have been telling lies about her fer decades, she is still unelectable.
Since when did it become more important to elect Hillary or ANYONE in particular than electing a Democrat? Than stopping another Republican from taking the white house? We fucked up nominating Hillary and we did it in part because the Democratic establishment told us to. So fuck Hillary and fuck the Democratic establishment.
Whatever the source of your hatred, my comment stands. You revel in the hatred, and it’s both unproductive and unhealthy.
Lies. You’re the one who won’t let it go.
More lies. You claimed that your message about Hillary was just in response to a Hillary supporter bringing it up in post #7. Except he didn’t it up. It was Hillary-hating friend, the now banned Great White Dope.
The truth is that you jumped in to defend GWD’s opinion on Hillary. The company you keep speaks all there is to know about you.
-
In point of fact, the Russians did hack the Trump campaign and the RNC. The didn’t release those embarrassing details about the Republicans. They held them back as compromising material. That’s probably why the Pubs in congress are so willing to cover for Donnie Moscow.
-
If you want to talk about “facts” -
-
Fact: the Democractic National Commitee is not obligated to help every rando who wants to run for office as a Democract.
-
Fact: the DNC is entitled to decide for themselves who they prefer as their nominee
-
Fact: the DNC has a system in place specifically to ensure that their handpicked candidate will win their nominations.
-
Fact: Bernie Sanders (who I supported) is not a god damn Democrat
-
Fact: it didn’t make a damn bit of difference, the Democrats were never going to allow a self-identified socialist who wasn’t a Democrat to be their choice
-
Fact: the DNC is entitled to support their preferred candidate for the nomination.
-
Fact: even if we all agreed that you are right and Clinton cheated, it wouldn’t have changed the outcome and Bernie would still not have been Democractic candidate
-
Fact: your refusal to drop this topic is based on your personal hatred of Hillary and her Vagenda of Manocide and everyone here can see that.
I laid out what I meant about Russia’s assault on our Democracy in my previous post. I mean, Russia’s blatant involvement in our entire Presidential campaign, starting with the fact they clearly have a hold on Donald Trump so that he acts like Putin’s buttwiper:
- Russia’s hacking of our electoral institutions, the way Russia released information so that it would damage Clinton.
- The way Russia carefully held onto the RNC information as compromat on the Republican politicians
- The way Russia manipilated the news fake stories to bolster their perfered candidate
- The way Russians have been propping up Donald’s businesses for years.
- The way Donald just happened to have multiple Russian agents (Manafort, Flynn, Page, Stone, Tillerson) as campaign officials.
- The way the Russian ambassador was having secret meetings with Donald’s team, including Jared Kushner, at Trump Tower, probably about the sanctions on Russia over Syria
- The way there was a secret server at Trump Tower, which was connected to the Alfa Bank in Russia
- And, not incidentally, the way that the Alfa Bank and the Trump campaign tried to play off that mystery server by saying that the connection was something to do with spam email from Spectrum Health - which is owned by Betsy De Vos’ brother, Dick.
- The way that pleasing Russia is clearly on Trump’s mind, causing him to check with Vlad before dropping that bomb in Syria
- The way that Russia is just not even being coy any more about how they control Donald, saying that firing Comey is “within the limits of his competence”
- The way that, the very next day, Putin told Donald to allow the Russian agents with their equipment into the Oval Office
- The way that Donald felt he had to impress them passing on intel we’d received from Israel (take that, Bibi!)
You know. Little things like Russia openly subverting our democractic election to put their agent Donald in office so that he can promote Russian interests and sow chaos in America.
Minor stuff like that. Nothing important, like how Donna Brazile tipped Hillary off that maybe she’d be asked about the death penalty. No way would Hillary ever have expected that question!
My point, which I apparently have yet to succeed in adequately communicating, is that it takes some combination of imbecility and/or America-hatred to have let “perceived” personality flaws/political limitations influence a voter to cast a vote which awarded the office to The America-hating fuckstick currently defiling the Oval Office with his presence. Particularly in light of Mrs. Clinton’s impressive credentials and experience.
Disagree. Good candidates can perform the job well. Poor candidates can NOT perform the job well.
When a poor candidate is selected to fill a position over a good candidate, it is the selection apparatus that failed.
I will concede that Mrs. Clinton managed the selection apparatus poorly.
Damuri Ajashi:. You know why no one reads your posts? Because you MAKE SO GOD DAMN MANY OF THEM IN A ROW.
I provided cites to DNC emails, Donna Brazile emails and the text to Hillary’s speeches. So far you have provided nothing. Even in a liberal echo chamber liek this one. Credibility is earned. YOu can’t just accuse someone of lying after they have provided cites. You aren’t Trump, noone will buy it.
I thought I corrected myself above and you acknowledged the correction, when I said that Buddha David was responding to a poster that was making fun of the OP. Wait, you aren’t one of those posters that hang on to a corrected error as if the error was never corrected, are you?
I jumped in to criticize Buddha David’s argument about the popular vote. I can’t believe all the butthurt over my post 23. I don’t think any of that stuff would be controversial outside a liberal echo chamber.
Cite for the point of fact that Russia hacked Trump Campaign?
Cite for the fact that they have embarrassing info they are holding back?
Of course not, they ought to be impartial.
Yeah, lets see what happens in the general if they try that in the primaries. Oh wait we did, Hillary lost.
And what do you think would happen if they did that. IIRC Hillary tried to get them to do that in 2008 when Obama was beating her. But they seemed to think it was a bad idea despite the fact that they could technically do whatever the fuck they want.
The fact that part of your argument includes the notion that The DNC is guiltless because they could have gone into a smoky room and emerged with their hand picked candidate says a lot about your perspective on democracy and the nature of the Democratic party.
So? Trump is not a goddam Republican. They Republicans still let him play in their reindeer games.
Even if they knew about the cheating before the primaries were over?
Sure, if that’s the Democratic party. If the DNC can can play favorites in the primaries, then we should just get that out there right now and let everyone know that the fix is in and that our primary votes only matter as long as they coincide with what the party bosses like Debbie Wasserman Schultz want.
I bet the knowledge of her cheating would have made a huge difference. heck Biden might have even jumped in the race.
Yes, I hate Hillary. She put Trump in the white house. Why don’t YOU hate her? Are you happy with what she has wrought?
And what is her Vagenda of manocide? Are you implying that I hate her because she is a woman? Because that gets thrown around a lot to anyone that criticizes Hillary with no basis in fact.
I think Trump is manipulable but I don’t see what “hold” oyu are talking about. Have we actually dropped the sanctions on Russia? Because Russia REALLY REALLY wants those sanctions lifted. Did their puppet lift those sanctions?
Clinton’s cheating is her own fault.
Cite?
Yes, that’s a problem. It was a problem when they did it to help JFK beat Nixon too.
“From Khrushchev’s point of view, an inexperienced, optimistic young senator was the preferred resident of the White House when compared to Nixon, the Cold War veteran who had bested Khrushchev in the 1959 Kitchen Debate. As Khrushchev explained to Salinger, he was “determined in his mind that Kennedy would make [a] better President,” so the head of the Kremlin did what lay in his power in order to put him into office.”
I think you need cites for this conspiracy theory stuff. because you seem to know things the FBI does not.
The difference between the two is that I have hard proof that Donna Brazile passed off debate questions (plural) to Hillary. You have mostly conspiracy theory and the mind blowing revalation that Russia would prefer a boob as POTUS than Hillary (who for all her faults would have been a good and competent president).
I would bet my left nut that if Trump had cheated during the debates people (including you) would be calling for nullificiation of the election or at least impeachment.
OK, then I guess you would say that every think tank, lobbying/law firm is filled to the gills with better candidates than Hillary but the selection apparatus has been failing to select these people for these positions by forcing them to run for office and win.
Mrs. Clinton’s main advantage was supposed to be that she was going to expertly navigate that selection process so we really oughtn’t give anyone else any serious thought.
I get a lot of vitriolic responses for some whose posts never get read.
Of the 10 posts in a row made on page 3 of this thread, 9 were either responding to my post or were clearly directed at me.
In what way would it have made things clearer or easier for anyone if I have responded to those 8 different posters all saying different things (except 'luci who made three thematically similar comments directed at me) in a single post? Or should I simply not respond and let the other side of the argument take the field?
Ha, so then he follows that with a tediously long one just to mix it up…
Yeah. His posts are too fucking long, too.
Plus, he’s an idiot, so only the most violently contentious among us respond to him.
I’ve decided that this needs a more emphatic response.
It’s not about what anybody “owes” Hillary. The ELECTORATE owes ITSELF the best President that is available on the ballot. In November, 2016, that was Hillary. Of this there is no doubt, and against it, there can be no argument.
The electorate FAILED itself, and awarded itself the WORST choice.
JFTR, I level no blame at you for the America-hating shitstain’s victory. You did not withhold your vote from the superior candidate; how should you bear any blame for her loss (and just for curiosity, how does one vote for a candidate more, or less enthusiastically)?
My quarrel with you in this thread is solely about [del]our differing definitions of “GOOD CANDIDATE”[/del] you having the wrong definition for “GOOD CANDIDATE,” and refusing to accept my correct one. 
Enthusiastic:
Put up lawn signs and bumper stickers and other forms of social proof, discuss and argue with people about the election, tell everyone about your awesome candidate.
Less enthusiastic:
Show up on election day to vote…well, if the line isn’t too long. It doesn’t really matter, all politicians are the same anyway.
At this point, Damuri Ajashi has spent more time bitching about debate questions than Clinton did preparing for the debates. 6 months after the election and a year after the primaries were done, he reads like a BernieBro that’s STILL pissed off his Savior didn’t win the primary. Because of debate questions, not because of anything the Sanders campaign did.
If I had left any point unaddressed, I would be accused of evading issues. Patting each other on the back and creating a more hermetically sealed echo chamber does nothing to further the fight against ignorance or the fight against Trump.
Sometimes I have to spell things out in long form for the less intelligent snowflakes.
I agree that Hillary was the best option available but that’s just our opinion. And I disagree that there wasn’t a level of entitlement in the Hilary campaign and among Hillary supporters. Anyone that didn’t lurv her was a misogynist as if there was no other reason to dislike her.
A lot of conservative people think that electing someone who will nominate conservative justices is better for he country in the long run and having an amateur at the wheel would be OK because he will have a bunch of experts around him didn’t really turnout that way but he’ still nominating conservative justices, so they are still cool with it).
A lot of people that I think you would consider reasonable had to hold their nose to vote for her. Perhaps next time we can give voters a better choice than someone like Hillary.