# Mrs Clinton's vulnerabilities which could be exploited in a Primary **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [April 23, 2015, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mrs-clintons-vulnerabilities-which-could-be-exploited-in-a-primary/718376 "2015-04-23T18:45:21Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2015, 12:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mrs-clintons-vulnerabilities-which-could-be-exploited-in-a-primary/718376/61 "2015-04-27T12:04:10Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > THe fact that Democrats don’t think THEY even have a credible alternative kinda makes that argument look foolish. You’ve all lost your minds. Do you truly think that Hillary Clinton is the only person in a country of 300 million who is fit to be President? Oh yeah, Warren too. So two people who are fit to be President in your minds. Naw. We have Joe Biden, Lincoln Chafee, Martin O’Malley, Bernie Sanders, Rachel Maddow, Ed Schultz, etc. There are a lot of good alternatives. None happen to be Republican. ---
**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:** [April 27, 2015, 12:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mrs-clintons-vulnerabilities-which-could-be-exploited-in-a-primary/718376/62 "2015-04-27T12:04:24Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > These are new scandals. Sure, she’s inoculated from her previous baggage(or more accurately it’s already baked into her poll numbers), but new stuff does damage. And she isn’t responding effectively. She’s been letting surrogates go out there without talking points, where they get to defend her without knowing any facts, which damages their credibility when facts do come out. A proper rapid response campaign tells surrogates what they need to know at the very least. So far, all they know is “right wing author”, which doesn’t help when the nation’s leading liberal newspaper is supporting his allegations. So now they need facts and they aren’t coming up with much. Why did Giustria come out with the first real rebuttal and not the Clinton campaign? So far, her campaign is looking worse than 2008, not better. > > You’ll notice that the Obama administration isn’t having any of it. When asked about Clinton, they say, “Ask the Clinton campaign”. Then the Clinton campaign refuses to answer questions. I’m not sure what part of this looks promising to you. It’s way, way too early to be saying any of this. This latest “scandal” hasn’t penetrated the national consciousness. Maybe it will once the campaign is in full swing, and Republican candidates are talking about it with every stump speech (though they’ll probably wait until they’ve sown up the nomination), but it hasn’t yet. If Hillary had a ‘vigorous response’ at this point, it could just blow the scandal up, since so many people aren’t paying attention. This isn’t a big scandal, at this point, and it doesn’t need a big response. Maybe it will later, but responding too early can be bad just like responding too late. ---
**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:** [April 27, 2015, 12:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mrs-clintons-vulnerabilities-which-could-be-exploited-in-a-primary/718376/63 "2015-04-27T12:05:33Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > THe fact that Democrats don’t think THEY even have a credible alternative kinda makes that argument look foolish. You’ve all lost your minds. Do you truly think that Hillary Clinton is the only person in a country of 300 million who is fit to be President? Oh yeah, Warren too. So two people who are fit to be President in your minds. Nope. Democrats don’t think this. You’re wrong about what Democrats think. Lots of people liking Hillary and rooting for her doesn’t mean they don’t like O’Malley, Biden, Brian Schweitzer, and others. It just means that, at this point, most Democrats are rooting for Hillary. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2015, 1:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mrs-clintons-vulnerabilities-which-could-be-exploited-in-a-primary/718376/64 "2015-04-27T13:02:46Z")
> [@Mr\_Quatro](#): > > The rumor is that Hillary Clinton announced her candidacy early due to a falling approval rating. Who’s spreading that one? And what makes you think it’s more likely than a desire to clear the field early? > [@](#): > > These present day problems will be talked about for the next 18 months. The Clintons foundation has to be above reproach for an honest run on the white house. Is that a standard you apply to all candidates? Who’s left afterward? > [@](#): > > She’s the front runner now, but with 15 months left leaves plenty of time for another person to step up to the plate and he or she is not going to win playing nice guy. Same question as always: Who? Same saying as always: You can’t beat somebody with nobody. > [@](#): > > She (Hillary Clinton) is like in a batting cage with pitches coming at her from all sides. > > Is she made of the right stuff? After more than twenty years of that and similar shit, you’re still not sure? > [@](#): > > If she wins the primary … I think Bush and Rubio can take her by not even bringing up her name. > > Like selling cars don’t tell the customer how bad the other cars are … tell them why your car is better. Now _that_ I’d like to hear more about. How would Bush and Rubio go about doing that? > [@adaher](#): > > These are new scandals. But it sure looks like the same old scandal-_mongering_, doesn’t it? How are you going to convince the electorate you’re not still slinging mud and crying wolf anymore? > [@](#): > > And she isn’t responding effectively… Etc. Your concern for her, no doubt sincere, is noted. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2015, 1:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mrs-clintons-vulnerabilities-which-could-be-exploited-in-a-primary/718376/65 "2015-04-27T13:35:38Z")
HRC has only one “vulnerability” that is truly disturbing: Her ties to [The Family](http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/The_Family) and the Christian Right. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2015, 2:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mrs-clintons-vulnerabilities-which-could-be-exploited-in-a-primary/718376/66 "2015-04-27T14:22:00Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > This isn’t a big scandal, at this point, and it doesn’t need a big response. Maybe it will later, but responding too early can be bad just like responding too late. Responding _at all_ can be bad, if it serves to legitimize the assertion. Ignoring it or laughing it off instead serves the narrative that this is just more of the Republicans’ habitual smear campaigning, and helps keep it rebounding against them. It’s worked for a long time for her, and there is no reason to expect it to stop working unless she starts to change the way she responds. ---
**Author:** ![Diceman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/22d042/32.png) [@Diceman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diceman)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2015, 2:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mrs-clintons-vulnerabilities-which-could-be-exploited-in-a-primary/718376/67 "2015-04-27T14:35:17Z")
Regarding the uranium scandal, one item I haven’t seen addressed yet is the claim that Bill Clinton very conveniently got a $500,000 speaking fee for a speech in Moscow after the sale was approved. If _that_ part proves to have legs, then forget about winning any elections; Bill & Hillary might want to start looking at real estate in non-extradition countries instead. ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2015, 2:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mrs-clintons-vulnerabilities-which-could-be-exploited-in-a-primary/718376/68 "2015-04-27T14:40:41Z")
> [@Diceman](#): > > Regarding the uranium scandal, one item I haven’t seen addressed yet is the claim that Bill Clinton very conveniently got a $500,000 speaking fee for a speech in Moscow after the sale was approved. If _that_ part proves to have legs, then forget about winning any elections; Bill & Hillary might want to start looking at real estate in non-extradition countries instead. Holy shit- does that mean that Russia might develop a nuclear bomb? ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2015, 2:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mrs-clintons-vulnerabilities-which-could-be-exploited-in-a-primary/718376/69 "2015-04-27T14:51:36Z")
Elvis, not responding to a story because you don’t want to give it legs makes sense if the story is reporting in the Moonie Times or Drudge. When the NY Times and Washington Post are running with it, it has legs already. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2015, 2:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mrs-clintons-vulnerabilities-which-could-be-exploited-in-a-primary/718376/70 "2015-04-27T14:57:52Z")
Not if spreading the story is helping serve the narrative that the Republicans are still working on their smear campaign, instead of working on making themselves something to vote _for_. But you can hope. Hope is a wonderful thing. ---
**Author:** ![Haberdash](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Haberdash](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Haberdash)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2015, 3:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mrs-clintons-vulnerabilities-which-could-be-exploited-in-a-primary/718376/71 "2015-04-27T15:15:01Z")
Wait, is the current talking point “Hillary Clinton may have changed U.S. foreign policy in response to a bribe from Russia, but the Republicans are worse” or “Hillary Clinton is the all-perfected savior and any allegations that she is capable of doing wrong are fabricated smears?” I haven’t checked Gawker today so I don’t know what you believe until you tell me. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2015, 3:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mrs-clintons-vulnerabilities-which-could-be-exploited-in-a-primary/718376/72 "2015-04-27T15:24:41Z")
> [@Haberdash](#): > > Hillary Clinton may have changed U.S. foreign policy Good one. She “may” have done lots of things. But, given how sorry is the state of Russia’s relations with the US and the rest of the world, “may” is less likely than “didn’t”, isn’t it? > [@](#): > > “Hillary Clinton is the all-perfected savior and any allegations that she is capable of doing wrong are fabricated smears?” Where have you seen that? > [@](#): > > I don’t know what you believe until you tell me. You \*could \*try paying attention and engaging in actual discussion. I do understand how much easier and more self-gratifying simple denunciation is by comparison, though. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2015, 3:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mrs-clintons-vulnerabilities-which-could-be-exploited-in-a-primary/718376/73 "2015-04-27T15:25:37Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Not if spreading the story is helping serve the narrative that the Republicans are still working on their smear campaign, instead of working on making themselves something to vote _for_. > > But you can hope. Hope is a wonderful thing. You guys are entering “skewed polls” territory here. There is no smear campaign. This is real stuff. The media is piling on mercilessly. Even if you are SURE that this is nothing, it HAS to be responded to, because it is already a huge deal. She can’t make it huger by responding to it. If anything, she makes it huger because the media keeps on running stories like, “The Clinton campaign did not respond to inquiries”. Then there’s the simple fact that the administration itself, which I think we would all agree is a pretty important entity, is referring the media to the Clinton campaign for answers. Once the administration starts referring the media to you, you can’t exactly get away with keeping your head down anymore. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2015, 4:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mrs-clintons-vulnerabilities-which-could-be-exploited-in-a-primary/718376/74 "2015-04-27T16:06:56Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > You guys are entering “skewed polls” territory here. Do you finally understand what those are? 😉 > [@](#): > > There is no smear campaign. When did it stop? > [@](#): > > Even if you are SURE that this is nothing, it HAS to be responded to, because it is already a huge deal. Hope is indeed a wonderful thing. > [@](#): > > Then there’s the simple fact that the administration itself, which I think we would all agree is a pretty important entity, is referring the media to the Clinton campaign for answers. The reasons for Clinton not to respond are the same as the reasons for Obama not to respond. You may not realize it, but they’re on the same side. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2015, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mrs-clintons-vulnerabilities-which-could-be-exploited-in-a-primary/718376/75 "2015-04-27T19:40:09Z")
There’s “no comment” and “ask the Clinton campaign”. The entire White House Press Corps has been referred to the Clinton campaign. That is officially a big deal. Stories on the NY Times front page don’t just go away on their own. It is you who is hoping a bit too fervently here. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2015, 8:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mrs-clintons-vulnerabilities-which-could-be-exploited-in-a-primary/718376/76 "2015-04-27T20:03:41Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > That is officially a big deal. Please change the channel once in awhile. ---
**Author:** ![GoodOmens](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/d26b3c/32.png) [@GoodOmens](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GoodOmens)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2015, 8:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mrs-clintons-vulnerabilities-which-could-be-exploited-in-a-primary/718376/77 "2015-04-27T20:44:47Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > HRC has only one “vulnerability” that is truly disturbing: Her ties to [The Family](http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/The_Family) and the Christian Right. Would you please define “ties” in this context? ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2015, 7:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mrs-clintons-vulnerabilities-which-could-be-exploited-in-a-primary/718376/78 "2015-04-28T07:10:35Z")
> **[Hillary Clinton's campaign says this new interview proves 'Clinton Cash' is bunk](https://www.businessinsider.com/hillary-clintons-campaign-this-interview-proves-clinton-cash-is-bunk-2015-4)** > > "'Clinton Cash' is nothing more than a tangled web of conspiracy theories backed by no actual evidence." I’m surprised it doesn’t bother anyone that she thinks you’re stupid. Her campaign’s response has been to attack Schweizer rather than his allegations. Which would be fine if the media hadn’t already done their OWN investigations, the results of which her campaign won’t address and probably can’t rebut. ---
**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:** [April 28, 2015, 11:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mrs-clintons-vulnerabilities-which-could-be-exploited-in-a-primary/718376/79 "2015-04-28T11:24:28Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > [Hillary Clinton's Campaign: This Interview Proves 'Clinton Cash' Is Bunk - Business Insider](http://www.businessinsider.com/hillary-clintons-campaign-this-interview-proves-clinton-cash-is-bunk-2015-4) > > I’m surprised it doesn’t bother anyone that she thinks you’re stupid. I’m less than confident in your mind-reading ability. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2015, 1:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mrs-clintons-vulnerabilities-which-could-be-exploited-in-a-primary/718376/80 "2015-04-28T13:24:40Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > I’m surprised it doesn’t bother anyone that she thinks you’re stupid. Where does it say that? > [@](#): > > Her campaign’s response has been to attack Schweizer rather than his allegations. A common response, even here, when one’s facts and/or reasoning are comprehensively refuted - complain of a _personal_ attack. :rolleyes: But that isn’t what “he omitted key details and has no direct evidence” amounts to, now is it? > [@](#): > > Which would be fine if the media hadn’t already done their OWN investigations, the results of which her campaign won’t address and probably can’t rebut. You want to see a personal attack? Here’s one from that same link you provided but evidently didn’t read, one \*synonymous \*with _many_ you yourself have made here: > [@](#): > > “No, we don’t have direct evidence. But it warrants further investigation because, again, George, this is part of the broader pattern. You either have to come to the conclusion that these are all coincidences or something else is afoot,” Schweizer said Sunday. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mrs-clintons-vulnerabilities-which-could-be-exploited-in-a-primary/718376.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mrs-clintons-vulnerabilities-which-could-be-exploited-in-a-primary/718376.md?page=5)