This is IMHO.
Sure, why not? It failed, but she was integral to the design of the bill. The point is she had a ton of legislative experience. You can get experience for the job. Nobody can train you to be the president, but you can still get analogous experience from similar jobs. Clinton was eminently qualified. Trump didn’t even read the fucking news beyond the pictures of his own ugly mug.
Hillary Clinton had no legislative experience when she attempted to create a health care program during her husband’s first term in office. She was the president’s wife. That’s all. And it was a huge mistake for Bill Clinton, as being the unlikable harpy she is, many people regarded this as an attempt to make her co-president without portfolio and it caused him many problems, not the least of which was that it contributed considerably to the Republican Revolution of 1994. He pulled her way back after that into more of a traditional First Lady role, at least so far as the public was aware. She continued to press for things and do battle and cuss people out and throw tantrums behind the scenes after that, as recounted in George Stephanopoulos’s book, but the public was unaware of all that.
I am wondering if the “just give him a chance” people care about the fact that he has no intentions of divesting from his business and is literally already using the Presidency to enrich himself and his family. Or do you care about the fact that he has had time to do 9 rallys and attack individuals by name on Twitter but not for the briefings he’s been offered. Or the fact that his cabinet is filled with unqualified Fox News personalities and conspiracy theorists. Do these things concern you? It’s an honest question.
Also, for poor people who will lose their health insurance this was a matter of life or death and some of them will die because of this.
And we can just give him out in four years? Maybe. If you’re poor or working class and don’t mind paying for the ID voting requires or waiting on line for hours because the polling places in your area have been purposefully reduced.
This Republican party is not normal. In North Carolina they lost the Governorship so they are spending their lame duck session stripping powers away from the Governor. That’s the mentality we’re dealing with, scorched earth. And now they have control of everything in Washington and guy in charge only seems to care about people chanting his name.
As fellow citizens who have just as much of a right to vote as I do? And who have the right to vote for or against a candidate for any reason at all, or no reason.
I may think them uninformed, but they may think the same of me. And since their circumstances are not my own then they may come to different choices than I do.
Really. Not that hard to suck it up and realize my preferred candidate did not win and to respect that someone else will be president, even if I do not respect that winning candidate.
Trump’s spectacular idiocy really makes him unique.
But I’d be pissed to see* any* Republican president take office when more Americans chose the Democrat. (Yes, I know about the Electoral College–and the Apportionment Act of 1911. The Donald is pissed about his Popular Loss–will he reach out to all of us or just get pissier?)
Cruz terrifies me. And benign tumors can be pretty nasty, too.
All hail our new Russian Lapdog!
Ok I read it. But I still don’t understand how that swayed the election for Trump.
Someone (still open for debate in my opinion) hacked the DNC and released a batch of internal emails. If that’s all they did to influence the election, how is that considered helping the Rupublicans? They showed some unsavory aspects of the Democrats and their internal issues, but Republicans mostly thought that anyway, in which case I doubt it swayed many on the right to do anything other than gloat. It didn’t change their vote.
Or are you saying it effected how the Democrats voted?
Assuming everything’s that being said about the Russians is true, and Putin himself authorized and encouraged it, how in your opinion did that effect the election?
ETA. Sorry, posted before I saw your comment.
I don’t think the “someone” is open to debate anymore.
In any case, the Russians’ crime was that they intended to influence the election in favor of Trump and took illegal steps to do so. If you steal the exam answers from your professor’s office before the test, THAT in itself is wrong. Whether you use the answers, don’t, get stopped before you can, or sell the answers to other students–all of those are questions after the fact.
Also, if you’re planning to pull out the “we do it, too” point, that doesn’t negate a major world power doing something illegal, not to mention wrong, in an attempt (whether successful or not) to influence an election in the USA in favor of one candidate over another.
That’s my take. Not set in stone. I’d like to hear others’ assessments, too.
Have you ever written an email which didn’t contain anything wrong or unethical which you wouldn’t like to come out to the public? How about an email that could be portrayed as such by unscrupulous actors with no interest in the truth? It’s pretty straightforward.
Our system of government is explicitly designed to allow us to oppose the presidency if we so choose.
And the engineers of the O-rings on the Challenger had a ton of experience on rocket design.
Regards,
Shodan
Occasional failure aside, I’d much rather be in a rocket designed by experienced rocket scientists than one designed by lay-people hellbent on showing me how good ole common sense and bootstraps are a replacement to any fancy Ivory Tower college learnin’.
Until the evidence is shown of course it is.
Bush, WMD’s and all that.
Facts not in evidence and all that. But assuming what you say is true, all of it, how did what they assumed to have done effect the election results? Are you arguing it disaffected Democrats? It empowered Republicans?
I’m not seeing the connection between leaking Democrat emails and that changing election results alone.
Had they hacked the machines and altered the vote count that way, then that’s another matter entirely and had that happened (nobody seems to be arguing that) I’d agree that it’s serious, big time.
But revealing internal emails showing strive and internal disagreements within the DNC? Who cares. I’d suspect most Republicans believed that anyway. What I suspect is the argument (although I haven’t heard it argued this way) is that it disaffected the Democrats. It was one more reason to stay home.
Is that the argument? If not what is it?
Not baiting, genuine.
It’s interesting you say wrong and unethical. And then talk about “the truth”, as if it’s two different things.
Just a side comment.
What’s so straightforward and apparently obvious?
Assuming they broke the law and it was Putin himself that was directly behind it, how did that effect the results? It’s the same question I’m asking ThelmaLou.
I’m not seeing an argument for that. Just that they did wrong immoral things and because of that alone the election was swayed. How, in your opinion?
And if the engineers had been listened to, rather than ignored because they were saying things that the managers did not want to hear, then things would have turned out differently.
Similarly to the Hillary bill. If you are the sort of person who would blame the engineers of the Challenger, the ones who were ignored when they voiced their concerns to management, then I can see how you would be the sort of person who would blame Hillary for the actions of others in relation to her health care bill.
AFAICT in this saga, in this analogy Hillary is the manager and people know their shit were the politcal engineers as it were.
I don’t recall any stories of Hillary wanted to smart thing X, but some idiots talked her out of it.
My impression is the exact opposite.
When will the whining over the whining over Hillary’s loss end?
We were talking about the saga of “hillarycare”, and the congress’s killing of it.
I don’t think your adaptation of the analogy holds at all.
Do you recall the story of Hillary wanting to do a Healthcare bill? Now, it was not that she was talked out of it, just like the engineers were not talked out of being concerned about the launch that day. She was overruled by congress, like the engineers were overruled that day.
Here is the simplest factual assessment:
Democrat voters, especially in ‘battleground’ states, stayed home in droves.
Michigan was the same story. North Carolina as well. If you can tell me how Russia’s hacking of DNC emails caused Democratic voters to stay home, I’ll concede the point. Otherwise, it sounds more like an HC failure within her own party to me - or at best the media polls meant to bolster her cause actually harmed it by building overconfidence.
The whining over Hillary’s loss will end just after you see that blinding white light in the sky and just before any of your unvaporized atoms are engulfed in a mushroom cloud with the Trump logo on it.That’s when it will end.