# Is it fair to askHillary to release transcripts of her speech even if we don't ask Republicans? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 25, 2016, 2:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-fair-to-askhillary-to-release-transcripts-of-her-speech-even-if-we-dont-ask-republicans/747091 "2016-02-25T14:17:10Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2016, 3:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-fair-to-askhillary-to-release-transcripts-of-her-speech-even-if-we-dont-ask-republicans/747091/81 "2016-03-07T15:18:00Z")
Even an ardent Hilary hater should look at that editorial and wonder why it doesn’t provide a source for its claim (particularly since candidates’ campaign finances are all out in the open). I’ll give you a hint: it’s because it’s not true (but right-wing media don’t understand how FEC reporting requirements work). ---
**Author:** ![Pearl\_Clutching\_Provocateur](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c68b51/32.png) [@Pearl\_Clutching\_Provocateur](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pearl_Clutching_Provocateur)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2016, 3:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-fair-to-askhillary-to-release-transcripts-of-her-speech-even-if-we-dont-ask-republicans/747091/82 "2016-03-07T15:24:49Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > Even an ardent Hilary hater should look at that editorial and wonder why it doesn’t provide a source for its claim (particularly since candidates’ campaign finances are all out in the open). I’ll give you a hint: it’s because it’s not true (but right-wing media don’t understand how FEC reporting requirements work). Why don’t you explain it? Please. > **[Home - FEC.gov](https://www.fec.gov/data/?search=C00575795&candidateCommitteeId=C00575795&tabIndex=1)** > > Find what you need to know about the federal campaign finance process. Explore legal resources, campaign finance data, help for candidates and committees, and more. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2016, 3:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-fair-to-askhillary-to-release-transcripts-of-her-speech-even-if-we-dont-ask-republicans/747091/83 "2016-03-07T15:49:34Z")
In-kind contributions by Hillary have to be assigned a value for reporting purposes, so there is no actual money going out. If you look at the receipts you can see that Hillary has actually self-funded her campaign to the (relatively minor) tune of $468,036. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2016, 6:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-fair-to-askhillary-to-release-transcripts-of-her-speech-even-if-we-dont-ask-republicans/747091/84 "2016-03-07T18:16:03Z")
> [@TriPolar](#): > > Because it tells me something about the competence and judgment of the candidate. It’s not always important, but it is when the candidate claims to have a long list of accomplishments and I can’t find any worth mentioning. Well it depends on what you are willing to call an accomplishment. She got elected senator. Most people would call that an accomplishment. Whether she would have been elected if her last name wasn’t Clinton…who knows. But then again Ted Kennedy would never have been elected Senator from Massachusetts if his last name wasn’t Kennedy. Mitt Romney wouldn’t have done nearly as much with his life if his last name wasn’t Romney. None of the Bush clan would have gotten very far if their last name wasn’t bush. etc. > [@](#): > > Given the circumstances when the campaign season began you could blame Ralph, and you can blame the idiot Democrats in Florida who can’t make a ballot, and plenty of others also. That dumb ass Al Gore or any other Democrat should have been able to waltz into the White House except Bill couldn’t keep it in his pants. I don’t give a rats ass who blows him but he knew damn well that the results of his behavior could be disastrous if he was caught, and they were. Are you kidding? If Gore was willing to let Bill Campaign for him, he could have won. THAT is the main argument the Nader folks have when we blame them for Bush. Gore could have won if he wasn’t reluctant to become Bill Clinton’s successor. That Monica Lewinsky thing didn’t hurt Gore. > [@](#): > > I could only quibble, in general that is correct. Then your statement verges on becoming meaningless, doesn’t it? Its a pox on everyone’s house, isn’t it? > [@](#): > > Yes it is. That’s the fault of those morons on the right. OR, Hillary is no worse than any other candidate but she has the baggage of hatred that is carried over from a time when women weren’t supposed to be as smart and outspoken as she was in the 1990s. If Michelle Obama were to do the exact same things today that Hilalry did in the 1990s, she would not suffer nearly as much for it. > [@](#): > > Sure, given no better choice that’s what we all do, vote for the lesser evil. And in this case I consider Bernie to be significantly more honest. If honesty was really an important quality in a politician, you would expect more honesty among politicians. As a whole I think whores are more honest than politicians. We don’t call them whores because they take your money and DON’T suck your dick. And honest politicians don’t even seem to be an important ingredient in a successful democracy. > [@](#): > > The FBI director should keep his mouth shut about hypotheticals of this nature. If it doesn’t happen soon get used to the phrase ‘President Trump’. You REALLY think Trump can beat Hillary? Or are you saying that the indictment will come down too late for the Democrats to recover? > [@](#): > > That would be a big of a disaster as what the GOP is trying to do right now. Maybe they have the same plan as the GOP, to nominate Mitt 😉 It depends. Should someone who is pulling maybe 20% of the delegates get the nomination simply because Hillary has pushed all the other candidates out of the race before she imploded? Because I can almost guarantee you that Bernie would not be winning the nomination if Hillary didn’t run for president this year. A shitload of other candidates would have jumped in but for Hillary sucking all the air out of the room. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2016, 6:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-fair-to-askhillary-to-release-transcripts-of-her-speech-even-if-we-dont-ask-republicans/747091/85 "2016-03-07T18:24:15Z")
> [@Grumman](#): > > There was that time that she voted in support of an illegal war that killed a hundred thousand people. That wasn’t incompetence. She voted (along with many other Democrats like Joe Biden and John Kerry) to authorize the use of military force but it was not carte blanche, the authorization to use military force also "required that sanctions or diplomacy be fully employed before force was used, i.e. force was to be used only as “necessary and appropriate in order to defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq,” and to do so only upon the President certifying to Congress that “diplomatic or other peaceful means” would be insufficient to defang Saddam. Despite those legal conditions, the following year we were at war–and millions of us were astonished that the Bush Administration, running roughshod over Congress’s requirements, hadn’t given more time for U.N. inspectors to complete their job of searching for weapons of mass destruction." > **[5 Myths (And One Big Truth) About Hillary's 2002 Iraq War Vote](https://www.huffpost.com/entry/five-myths-about-hillary-iraq-war-vote_b_9177420)** > > Like many simplistic and "sound bite" arguments of the modern era, and of Sanders in particular, the argument that Hillary Clinton supported the war George W. Bush prosecuted in Iraq is nonsense. With that said, it would have been better if she called bullshit on the Bush administration back then. ---
**Author:** ![Pearl\_Clutching\_Provocateur](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c68b51/32.png) [@Pearl\_Clutching\_Provocateur](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pearl_Clutching_Provocateur)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2016, 7:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-fair-to-askhillary-to-release-transcripts-of-her-speech-even-if-we-dont-ask-republicans/747091/86 "2016-03-07T19:29:50Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > In-kind contributions by Hillary have to be assigned a value for reporting purposes, so there is no actual money going out. If you look at the receipts you can see that Hillary has actually self-funded her campaign to the (relatively minor) tune of $468,036. Can you provide real world examples of Hillary’s in-kind contributions or give a more detailed explanation? I support the idea that candidates receive some sort of salary during a campaign which would allow people who aren’t wealthy to participate. Hillary is wealthy and shouldn’t receive a salary. But that is entirely up to her donors. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2016, 8:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-fair-to-askhillary-to-release-transcripts-of-her-speech-even-if-we-dont-ask-republicans/747091/87 "2016-03-07T20:09:21Z")
> [@Pearl\_Clutching\_Provocateur](#): > > Can you provide real world examples of Hillary’s in-kind contributions or give a more detailed explanation? Sure. Let’s say as part of your own mayoral campaign, PCP for Peoria, you spent 5 hours licking envelopes. Under the FEC rules, you have to disclose the time you put in as both a contribution and an expenditure. Clinton would also have had to disclose things like the market value of “renting” her own home for a campaign event and things like that. This is [the original article](http://freebeacon.com/politics/hillary-paid-herself-250000-from-campaign-funds/) that the NY Post and a bunch of conservative news outlets have been parroting. You’ll see an update right at the top about the in kind accounting. Clinton lost more than $13 million on her 2008 campaign. Whatever shady things she might be up to, personally profiting from her candidacy (at least financially) is not among them. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2016, 8:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-fair-to-askhillary-to-release-transcripts-of-her-speech-even-if-we-dont-ask-republicans/747091/88 "2016-03-07T20:35:47Z")
Not to mention that it’s incredibly ridiculous to interpret “Candidate Contributions” as a salary she’s paying herself. It is pretty obviously what the candidate has contributed to the campaign, not the reverse. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2016, 10:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-fair-to-askhillary-to-release-transcripts-of-her-speech-even-if-we-dont-ask-republicans/747091/89 "2016-03-07T22:03:39Z")
Has Hillary released the transcripts of her speeches yet? At a town hall meeting, Bernie and Hillary were asked to release transcripts of their speeches. Bernie is asking about Hillary’s speaking fees from, and speeches to, Wall Street. Should voters expect Hillary to transparent? Or doesn’t that matter? ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2016, 5:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-fair-to-askhillary-to-release-transcripts-of-her-speech-even-if-we-dont-ask-republicans/747091/90 "2016-03-08T17:05:34Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > Has Hillary released the transcripts of her speeches yet? At a town hall meeting, Bernie and Hillary were asked to release transcripts of their speeches. Bernie is asking about Hillary’s speaking fees from, and speeches to, Wall Street. Should voters expect Hillary to transparent? Or doesn’t that matter? At this point I don’t think anything other than an indictment matters for the Democratic primary. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2016, 4:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-fair-to-askhillary-to-release-transcripts-of-her-speech-even-if-we-dont-ask-republicans/747091/91 "2016-03-09T16:37:26Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > At this point I don’t think anything other than an indictment matters for the Democratic primary. I doubt that the Democrat collective will accept an indictment. Pre, or post, convention. OTOH, an indictment will have some effect on independents. Can’t win without the independents. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2016, 5:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-fair-to-askhillary-to-release-transcripts-of-her-speech-even-if-we-dont-ask-republicans/747091/92 "2016-03-09T17:27:14Z")
It’s pretty amazing that she’s able to get away with not releasing her speeches for the reason she claims. I’d like an interviewer to take her through something like this: \*\*Interviewer: \*\*There seems to be a lot of interest in primary voters being able to look at the paid speeches you made to Wall Street. Given how important the roll Waall St. plays in our economy and peoples distrust of it, why won’t you let the voters see what you said? \*\*Clinton: \*\*I give a lot of speeches, and if everyone wants to release the text of every speech they ever given, I’ll be glad to do so. \*\*Interviewer: \*\*But your sole competitor, the on person you’re running against, Bernie Sanders has agreed to do so. Why won’t you. \*\*Clinton: \*\*Bernie is just one person in this race, as I said, if every candidate agrees to release the transcripts of every speech they were paid to give, I’ll be glad to relate the transcripts you’re alluding to. \*\*Interviewer: \*\*But isn’t that an impossibly high bar, and one that means you’ll never have to release transcripts that the voters would like to see? If Bernie and every Rep candidate agreed to this tomorrow, you could simply claim, “Well, how do I know that is ALL of them.” \*\*Clinton: \*\*I’ve given plenty of campaign speeches and people know where I stand on Wall Street. \*\*Interviewer: \*\*How about this…people want top look±specifically—at the speeches you were paid to make for the Wall Street crowd, could you at least identify a list of speeches made by Bernie, Trump, Cruz, Rubio or Katich that you think would be of interest? If they released those specific texts, would you then rtelase the transcripts or tests for the speeches you’ve made to the Wall Street Crowd? \*\*Clinton: \*\* … ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2016, 5:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-fair-to-askhillary-to-release-transcripts-of-her-speech-even-if-we-dont-ask-republicans/747091/93 "2016-03-09T17:50:25Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > It’s pretty amazing that she’s able to get away with not releasing her speeches for the reason she claims. I’d like an interviewer to take her through something like this: > > \*\*Interviewer: \*\*There seems to be a lot of interest in primary voters being able to look at the paid speeches you made to Wall Street. Given how important the roll Waall St. plays in our economy and peoples distrust of it, why won’t you let the voters see what you said? > > \*\*Clinton: \*\*I give a lot of speeches, and if everyone wants to release the text of every speech they ever given, I’ll be glad to do so. > > \*\*Interviewer: \*\*But your sole competitor, the on person you’re running against, Bernie Sanders has agreed to do so. Why won’t you. > > \*\*Clinton: \*\*Bernie is just one person in this race, as I said, if every candidate agrees to release the transcripts of every speech they were paid to give, I’ll be glad to relate the transcripts you’re alluding to. > > \*\*Interviewer: \*\*But isn’t that an impossibly high bar, and one that means you’ll never have to release transcripts that the voters would like to see? If Bernie and every Rep candidate agreed to this tomorrow, you could simply claim, “Well, how do I know that is ALL of them.” > > \*\*Clinton: \*\*I’ve given plenty of campaign speeches and people know where I stand on Wall Street. > > \*\*Interviewer: \*\*How about this…people want top look±specifically—at the speeches you were paid to make for the Wall Street crowd, could you at least identify a list of speeches made by Bernie, Trump, Cruz, Rubio or Katich that you think would be of interest? If they released those specific texts, would you then rtelase the transcripts or tests for the speeches you’ve made to the Wall Street Crowd? > > \*\*Clinton: \*\* … The last answer would be pretty easy, it seems to me: “I’m much more interested in solving real problems, and analyzing what they have to say now about the policies they push, then digging around to find every last speech that every candidate makes. But if my opponents, including all the possible general elections opponents, make such a list and release their speeches, then I will as well, but I think the American people are much more interested in what we can do to help the economy, help Americans get access to health care, find jobs, and the other problems that every day Americans are facing.” Yeah, it’s political gobbledygook (though not a bad effort at it, if I may say so myself :)). And Hillary is definitely dodging this – I wouldn’t be surprised if there are all kinds of things in those speeches (praise for Wall Street, jokes at the expense of the little guy, vague promises to help Wall Street, etc.) that could harm her candidacy if released. But at this point there seems (to me, at least) to be very little outcry for her to release these speeches, and therefore no political gain to doing so (and lots to potentially lose), and it’s a pretty easy thing to dodge. ---
**Author:** ![PastTense](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pasttense/32/14550_2.png) [@PastTense](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PastTense)\ **Post date:** [April 16, 2016, 6:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-fair-to-askhillary-to-release-transcripts-of-her-speech-even-if-we-dont-ask-republicans/747091/94 "2016-04-16T06:53:17Z")
> [@](#): > > **Release of Clinton’s Wall Street Speeches Could End Her Candidacy for President** > Here’s a compilation of what those close to Clinton and/or the institutions that paid her obscene sums to chat with them are saying about those never-to-be-released speeches: > > 1. Goldman Sachs Employee #1 (present at one of the speeches) > > “[The speech] was pretty glowing about [Goldman Sachs]. It’s so far from what she sounds like as a candidate now. It was like a ‘rah-rah’ speech. She sounded more like a Goldman Sachs managing director.” > > 1. Goldman Sachs Executive or Client #1 (present at one of the speeches) > > “Mrs. Clinton didn’t single out bankers or any other group for causing the 2008 financial crisis. Instead, she effectively said, ‘We’re all in this together, we’ve got to find our way out of it together.’” > > 1. Paraphrase of Several Attendees’ Accounts From Politico > > “Clinton offered a message that the collected plutocrats found reassuring, declaring that the banker-bashing so popular within both political parties was unproductive and indeed foolish. Striking a soothing note on the global financial crisis, she told the audience, ‘We all got into this mess together, and we’re all going to have to work together to get out of it.’” > **[Release of Clinton's Wall Street Speeches Could End Her Candidacy for President](https://www.huffpost.com/entry/release-of-clintons-wall-street-speeches_b_9698632)** > > The reason you and I will never see the transcripts of Hillary Clinton's speeches to Wall Street fat-cats is that if she were ever to release those transcripts, it could end her candidacy for president. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_Ace](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/6bbea6/32.png) [@Johnny\_Ace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_Ace)\ **Post date:** [April 16, 2016, 8:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-fair-to-askhillary-to-release-transcripts-of-her-speech-even-if-we-dont-ask-republicans/747091/95 "2016-04-16T08:10:09Z")
> [@Diceman](#): > > The question nobody has had the guts to ask yet is, at what point does this kind of thing cross the line into bribery and/or influence peddling? It doesn’t. People seem to miss (or conveniently ignore) that those speeches were made after she left the government. It’s perfectly legal. ---
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2016, 11:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-fair-to-askhillary-to-release-transcripts-of-her-speech-even-if-we-dont-ask-republicans/747091/96 "2016-04-17T11:27:43Z")
> [@PastTense](#): > > [Release of Clinton's Wall Street Speeches Could End Her Candidacy for President | HuffPost Latest News](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/seth-abramson/release-of-clintons-wall-street-speeches_b_9698632.html) Pfff…Abramson writes weekly pro-Bernie articles for Huff Post. If you read his articles, you’d think Sanders had already won the nomination. Take with a grain of salt. ---
**Author:** ![PastTense](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pasttense/32/14550_2.png) [@PastTense](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PastTense)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2016, 3:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-fair-to-askhillary-to-release-transcripts-of-her-speech-even-if-we-dont-ask-republicans/747091/97 "2016-04-17T15:51:35Z")
I think these speeches are comparable to Romney’s 47% comment. ---
**Author:** ![Procrustus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/procrustus/32/2994_2.png) [@Procrustus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Procrustus)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2016, 4:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-fair-to-askhillary-to-release-transcripts-of-her-speech-even-if-we-dont-ask-republicans/747091/98 "2016-04-17T16:08:10Z")
> [@PastTense](#): > > I think these speeches are comparable to Romney’s 47% comment. A whoosh? No way are these like the 47% comment by Romney. Romney basically said half the country, including a great deal of Republicans, don’t have any work ethic and are only concerned about what the government can give them. In contract, Clinton says nice things about a big company that invited, and paid her, to speak. How would Trump even use this against her in the general election? ---
**Author:** ![andros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e480ec/32.png) [@andros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/andros)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2016, 5:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-fair-to-askhillary-to-release-transcripts-of-her-speech-even-if-we-dont-ask-republicans/747091/99 "2016-04-17T17:03:38Z")
> [@Procrustus](#): > > In contract, Clinton says nice things about a big company that invited, and paid her, to speak. How would Trump even use this against her in the general election? Oh, that’s easy: “I don’t have to do things like that because I’m already really really rich. She’s sold out to corporate interests and I make the best deals with them from a position of yuge yuge strength.” ---
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2016, 5:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-fair-to-askhillary-to-release-transcripts-of-her-speech-even-if-we-dont-ask-republicans/747091/100 "2016-04-17T17:38:47Z")
> [@andros](#): > > Oh, that’s easy: > > “I don’t have to do things like that because I’m already really really rich. She’s sold out to corporate interests and I make the best deals with them from a position of yuge yuge strength.” Trump would have a real time selling his bull manure to democratic and center-left independent voters. It’s mostly anti-intellectuals who vote for Trump. Both he and Cruz have ceilings that are going to be hard to break through, though I’d give Cruz a much better chance if only because he can rally his base of red state Christian jihadists to show up at the polls and rile up everyone else who has an allergic reaction to the name Clinton. Trump won’t even be able to unite his own party. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-fair-to-askhillary-to-release-transcripts-of-her-speech-even-if-we-dont-ask-republicans/747091.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-fair-to-askhillary-to-release-transcripts-of-her-speech-even-if-we-dont-ask-republicans/747091.md?page=6)