Some historical data. The GOP poll leader 4 years ago was Michelle Bachmann. Eight years ago Fred Thompson and Rudy Giuliani were neck and neck.
In August 1991, the top two Dem candidates in the polls were Jesse Jackson and Mario Cuomo (that’s Governor Cuomo to you, adaher). Jackson also led four years before that.
Enjoy your summers, people.
It could be worse. You could be using all the historical and current polling and other trending data along with links to sources to back up what you are saying… in support of a republican.
And as I said:
Bite your tongue.
Do you work for the US state department? If not, I don’t think anybody would expect for you to have seen anything that would be potentially damaging to our national security. At least 2 emails have been deemed to be Top Secret. The review of the emails is ongoing.
Anything sensitive would be redacted. That some have since been marked as classified tells us little about whether the information was classified when she sent the emails.
That misses the point. DId she discuss classified information by email that was classified information at the time?
So it doesn’t have to be about Benghazi anymore?
It can be both. She might have sent classified information related to Benghazi 
We don’t know yet.
The leads in those cases were in the 10-20% range-in the current case its more in the range of 50 percent (http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/08/12/bernie-sanders-big-challenge-explained-in-1-chart/). Obviously, this also assumes Hillary hasn’t learned anything from 2008 and will make the same mistakes regarding the black vote and caucus states. Finally, I’m a Bernie supporter-I’m just realistic about the course of the primaries and don’t see the reason for Hillary hate.
First of all, you’re looking at the charts wrong. Look at the light blue lines that adjusts for whether or not the participant had even heard of the candidate. Those lines are separated by about 10 percent. And every pollster is indicating that his approval jumps when he had name recognition.
In other words, her current lead has little to nothing to do with a preference for her policies or her candidacy and everything to do with the fact that people already know her. Talk to me after the debates get started.
To help you understand my disdain for her, watch this short video; I think it sums it up perfectly. I don’t trust her even the tiniest little bit. I think she’s a panderer with no real core values – they seem to change as the wind blows. She’s got dangerous right-wing economic policies (she’s still touting trickle down on her campaign website for God’s sake!), she has terrible risk assessment skills that manifest in things like giving Bush the authority to take us to war (not because she thought it was the right thing to do, but so she could preserve the right for future presidents … like herself. It was a grossly calculated move based on her own ambitions and not what was right for the country.) and to keep a personal freaking server in her home to conduct government business!
And that’s not to mention the fact that if the party is stupid enough to make her the nominee, we will lose to the Republicans in a landslide because they relish nothing more than casting a vote against her. But even if she did pull out a miracle and win, we’d be subjected to the most brutal four years of deadlock we’ve ever seen in our history. I lived through her husband’s last term and all the damn impeachment hearings and bullshit they threw his way. The obstruction against Obama has been brutal, but those Clinton years were excruciating and painful for the entire country. I do not want to have to live through that again.
And you think the GOP will be willing to work with President SOCIALIST Bernie Sanders? Give me a break.
Exactly.
I’d trust Hillary with my tax dollars before I’d trust the socialist.
No, you give me a break. Sanders knows these guys well because they have worked side by side for nearly 30 years. He happens to have a conciliatory relationship with them. They loathe her. Despise. They’ve got nothing to put Sanders up for impeachment on the second he takes the oath of office like they will her, either. That’s not to say that I expect them to play nice, but if you can’t see how much exponentially worse it would be with their most despised enemy as president, then you’ve got your head buried way too deep in the sand.
Also? He’s not a fucking Socialist.
You need to tell him that. You’re right, but he’s the one mislabelling himself.
Approval =/= support-most Democrats probably like most of the Democratic candidates but they still each only have one vote. And the polls I was referring to indicated actual support among minorities, not approval.
Or maybe a lot of voters just like Hillary and see her as an experienced politician. Shocking I know.
TPP? Check.
Monsanto? Check.
“No better than Jeb Bush”? Check.
Sounds like a typical “progressive” hitpiece achieved largely by stringing together the usual cliches, with an incredibly condescending attitude to match.
And some people would say the same about Bernie Sanders
So right-wing she’s to the left of the President on economic issues
I guess that disqualifies Biden from the Presidency (and thus by extension from the Vice Presidency) as well as Reid from his Senate leadership position.
No need to repeat Republican agitprop.
And there’s a huge block of Democratic voters who would relish nothing more than the prospect of casting a vote for Hillary. From Madison or Eugene this may not be immediately apparent, but there are legions of voters in the Bronx and Brooklyn, in Cleveland and Chicago, in Laredo and Los Angeles, in the Appalachia and the Ozarks who are very much devotees of the Clintons.
As opposed to the success of our “post-partisan” President? Not to mention deadlock is not necessarily bad-better that than say a “grand bargain” that guts Social Security and it might be the one thing that can undermine a GOP Congressional majority.
That implies that the Republicans will be able to get their hands on a faux-scandal big enough to seriously bring impeachment charges, with most of the Republican caucus going with them.
And the Clintons never worked with the Republicans? There’s a certain contradiction in your simultaneously arguing that the Clintons are really Republicans in all but name yet that they uniquely despise the Clintons more than Obama or Sanders or any other Democratic politician.
Neither is Obama but that hasn’t stopped Republicans. It certainly doesn’t help that Sanders has referred to himself as a Socialist.
A distinction I’m sure the GOP (and their constituents) will make. :rolleyes:
The Clintons work with Republicans very well. Clinton is going to do what’s best for Clinton, and that means triangulation. Democratic primary voters don’t punish it and are happy to piggyback on the success of policies they oppose if it means winning elections. So there’s only an upside for Clinton in triangulating. She’ll have a successful Presidency by giving the Republican Congress most of what it wants while still insuring that some Democratic priorities get taken care of, and public will be happy, and a few hundred thousand foreigners will meet their deaths at the hands of our armed forces.