Might have missed a few details: The media outlets are controlled by the lizard people, and the Electoral College is in cahoots with the Illuminati.
Yeah! Wake up, sheeple! Then go off and ignore politics.
I suppose Democrats can cry about how unfair life and the media are, or they could nominate someone unsullied. It didn’t kill you guys to do it in 2008, why not just do it again?
Like if the birther movement did not happen, and also the soiling (in the mind of the right) caused by alleged associations with radicals from the past. As pointed before it is the insane twist of the facts and overreach of the efforts by the right and the “we should have a horse race at all costs” mainstream media the things that makes Clinton look better in the eyes of many.
So you need to ask yourself why it works to bring Hillary down but not other Democrats.
Meh, you are just ignoring that other democrats are not the front runners, until they do become front runners it is when the “we should have a horse race at all costs” mainstream media will get on their case.
Politifact should really be called ‘Politequate’ because of their deep-seated need to find a roughly equal amount of falsehoods on both sides. Which usually involves them seriously stretching things to score points on Dems.
That Politifact rates something as a falsehood, by itself, isn’t worth much. You’ve got to bring their argument forward and show us why it’s solid. (Sometimes they actually do make a solid case.) But just citing a Politifact rating is meaningless in and of itself.
No, you should be able to figure this out yourself, because it’s pretty damn obvious. I don’t need to ask myself why water is wet.
You’ve had plenty of time to consider the matter, and have no shortage of opinions on far less weighty matters. Your claimed reluctance to take a stand on this one does not speak well.
How about when the “scandal” is manufactured as clumsily as they all have been? Responding to one does nothing except validate it, so the best response is *not *to respond.
You *know *why. :rolleyes:
Whoa, whoa, whoa… slow down now… water is what? Lemme get a pencil; I better write this down!
You remind me of (I think) IOZ, who said the smell of baked bread is worth a thousand Obamas and hope and change platitudes.
People know democracy and elections are a gentlemen’s duel between different sectors of capital. But duels are fun. The form matters not. We’d be following the same chattering political classes if we were run by a king or a council of cardinals. Oh, did you see how the Duchess of Burgundy spoke out of turn at the big state dinner? And the color of her scarf was an obvious insult to the Duke of Normandy. Meow!
Ooh, “unsullied.” Like those eunuch warriors in Game of Thrones. Even they could be purchased.
In the non-fantasy world, which politician is “unsullied”? In either party? (“Dumb as a rock” won’t do.)
These “scandals” will either peak (if they haven’t already) and go down steadily, and most people will no longer care about them (since most people have probably made up their mind about Hillary years ago); or something new will break that actually breaks through and sinks her campaign, and the Democrats will nominate someone else. I think the second is not very likely – but if it happens, it would probably happen soon, as much digging as everyone (including Federal agencies) is doing. Obama, being a good Democrat, will most likely be ordering his cabinet and agencies to dig as much as they can so that any potential “Hillary-killer” would come out as early as possible giving the party time to nominate someone else (like Biden). If they don’t find anything – and they will have as much motivation, desire, and scandal-finding skill as the Republicans or anyone else – then there’s probably nothing to fine, and it will mostly blow over and Hillary will be fine.
Why do you think that didn’t happen long ago, and continuously since? That gives the scandal-manufacturers more credit for possibly having a point than they deserve.
It may well have already happened (and likely still is) – I think the chances are quite low that there is anything significant to any of these supposed scandals for Hillary. I think it’s quite likely that in 6 months she’ll still be the front runner, and the email-talk will mostly be done.
If, after all this scrutiny, there still isn’t anything, I’m willing to say there isn’t anything.
Most likely you’re correct.
It does not mean though that they will find something that they will twist to sound as it was the worst crime in history. Many of the same faces from the extreme right are also involved in climate change denial and I already know how dastardly and asinine they can be with quotes taken out of context from an email fishing expedition.
I want to be wrong on this one but I do think that this is what it is coming next, FOX news and many others will ignore the context and mislead their viewers as usual.
The email story only goes into the background if there’s nothing new to report. Thus my argument that she needs to get it all out there rather than lying and then creating a headline when she gets caught weeks later.
Again, an argument that it is not well supported.