To pile on further, the RW misinformation campaign has been going on for quite sometime, and it’s becoming bolder and more obvious to rational people. They not only stretch the truth and twist the facts, the totally make shit up…ie: this article about the denial of the polls.
It’s getting where it’s opposite day every day in the right wing world, and people know it.
Watch Clothahump not be able to name a single felony that she has committed and you will have your answer.
Indeed. I think the OP has the answer to his question now - delivered by Clothahump himself.
The reason for the “apathy” is that for the past 20 years, all we’ve been hearing from the other end of the political spectrum is:
“Hillary is bad. Really really bad. A criminal in fact! We know she is bad, because we’ve been accusing her of being bad for years! That’s all the proof we need - our own accusations.”
Criticizing Hillary right now equates to campaigning for an alternative. There is no alternative.
Wah? Huh?
Hillary wanted the spelling changed. Didn’t you get the memo?
See - it’s shit like this that makes it impossible to take any of the conservative hatred for Hillary seriously.
Hillary has been investigated repeatedly by everyone from Congress on down. Millions of dollars and twenty-some years have been put into investigating her.
She has never been arrested.
She has never been charged with a felony.
She has never been convicted of anything, ever.
But conservatives will still come running in, insisting that Hillary is a felon and we’re all just a bunch of blind worshipers for supporting her.
Because she’s still standing. After decades of having shit thrown at her, she’s still right there, fighting her fight. Philandering husband’s scandal didn’t stop her. She’s still aiming for her political objectives all these years later, and believes they can be realized though the public grows ever more cynical.
How you spent the last three decades of your life, says a lot about who you are today, I think. And Hilary spent them fighting for what she believes in, and doing her job well according to those who elected her.
We all know politicians are evil and crooked, but I suppose best vote for an evil and crooked one from your own party as opposed to the opposition.
That’s why I’ve never voted. From my point of view voting for someone is supporting them, and there’s never been a high level politician worthy of my support.
I don’t have time to respond much now, but I’ve read every post. I’m just looking for the truth. Some people are saying that she’s the best option right now, and that’s all that matters.
I WANT people who are claiming she’s a criminal to answer why. To be honest, I don’t fully even understand half of the things charged at her… even the emails, which seems to be, judging by the posts here, the most damning thing about her, I don’t understand the gravity of the “scandal”. I just know there’s a varying degree of how important it seems to certain individuals.
I could try to list the news articles I’ve read that I don’t understand, but to be honest, I’ve either forgotten what the charges are, or I don’t understand them enough to list them. So I go on here to see what people think… and they aren’t mentioned, or they are tucked away in a thread I didn’t click on because I don’t have to time to look at everything in the Pit or GD’s or Elections to find where it’s been brought up.
I would make new threads, but I don’t want to be someone who says; “What do people think about this charge?” EVERY TIME I read something bad about her or her husband.
That’s why I brought up the “Bill might be a rapist” in here. I KNOW it’s NOT Hillary, I just don’t want to make a thousand threads asking; “What’s the deal with this…?” I know he was accused of rape. Yes, it was a long time ago, but if true, it would certainty alter my opinion of the man. People are saying that Liberals have zero-tolerance for rape, unless it’s Bill.
I don’t believe everything I read online and come here for real answers. But if I can’t find a mention of a charge… I don’t know why it may be untrue, (or true for that matter). People are right, there’s been a lot of BS about Hillary… or gray area stuff at best.
I don’t know… I’m not TRYING to dislike Hillary any more than I do… I just want the truth. Perhaps I’m not justified in disliking her to the degree I already do. I would rather like her than not.
Sorry for the hasty reply… I just wanted to tell people where I’m coming from. I HAVE to leave for work now.
I really do appreciate the responses, and I’m REALLY trying to keep an open mind.
She hasn’t even been sanctioned, fined, had to issue a letter of apology, or whatever… and yet they still think she’s guilty. Of something.
Why the apathy over negitve things Hillary Clinton’s done?
If you assume 10% or so of the charges against her have some basis in reality, what then? What are people afraid she will actually do as President because of these things? In my view, she’ll be working towards things I want done. Not perfectly, and not everything, but basically what I want.
I’m voting for Hillary because I think Trump is one of the most uniquely unqualified people to be President of the USA to run for the job in my lifetime.
Also, I have come to view the Republicans approach to politics as criticizing, slandering and otherwise generating a steady buzz of negative noise about anything and anyone that doesn’t fit their narrow ideology. Which causes me to disbelieve anything they say or do.
My understanding of what Hillary has actually done is as follows:
Role in Benghazi Embassy attacks - Something ranging from failing to provide adequate security to intentionally lying about the attacks being sparked by some video or something. It’s not clear to me why that’s important, but I can see it as something the Republicans would glom onto and endlessly repeat “look, she lied!” over and over again.
Email scandal - Showed a shocking lack of judgment in setting up a private email server in her house that may have resulted in the leaking of classified emails. To be honest, it’s not clear to me why she would do this as opposed to just use the official US Government IT Department. My understanding is that she was cleared by that left-wing organization, the FBI.
A lot of vague questions around what exactly the Clinton Foundation actually does, who donates and whether there are conflict of interests.
I think she might have murdered a bunch of people or had them murdered.
Again, I don’t know what specific crimes she is accused of. But it’s like high school politics. If your friends keep calling that girl they don’t like a “bitch” and a “slut” long and loud enough, eventually that will be her reputation and no one else will want to hang out with her.
It seems a lot of the “scandals” are just used as a proxy to bring her down. People aren’t really upset about what she did. Rather, they don’t like her and will leverage anything which can be perceived negatively against her.
It reminds me of the way neighborhoods will react to development around them. If the development is for something they want (Whole Foods), then they’re all for it. But if it’s something they don’t want (Walmart), then suddenly they’re all concerned about traffic flow and endangered salamanders that will be harmed by loss of habitat and parking lot runoff.
If things like email security and embassy protection is such an important issue, I would expect there to be more concern about all the times there are errors. But somehow it’s only Hillary who gets pressure about how emails are handled and how much security is at an embassy. What about all the times in the past where similar problems came to light? Why didn’t the R’s hold hearings for all the embassy attacks before Hillary? If Trump wins the election and then one of our embassies is attacked, will the R’s hold similar hearings against the Republican Sec of State? Probably not. This inconsistency makes it clear that the “scandals” are just a facade cooked up to try to bring down someone they don’t like rather than an investigation into an actual criminal act.
The devil is in the details, and there will be no details.
Benghazi: people died…Hillary killed them. Those dots in between will never be explained.
Vince Foster died…Hillary killed him. Rinse, repeat.
The key is in making these allegations headlines and beating a drum. It works on feeble minds.
So far, no one in this thread has brought up the WikiLeaks email dump. Those emails allegedly show that higher-ups in the Democratic Party, including Hillary Clinton, conspired to prevent Bernie Sanders from winning the Democratic nomination for President. Some seem to believe that Sanders, a newcomer to the Democratic Party, should have had an equal opportunity to win the nomination. In other words, the Party leadership should have been neutral in the primary race. This feeds into Trump’s accusation that, if he loses, the election will have been rigged by “Crooked Hillary” and her minions.
Personally, this is all nonsense. Members of the DNC are allowed to have opinions and to express those opinions. Clinton has been a Democrat from way back and has toed the Party line her whole life. When she felt that the Party needed to move in a certain direction, she worked with Party leaders to make the changes she wanted. Sanders, on the other hand, has shown disdain for the Democratic Party throughout his political career. While he caucuses with Democrats as a Senator, he does not sit as a Democrat. He is an Independent. The idea that Democrats in leadership positions wished to nominate a long-time Democrat instead of a Dem-cum-lately has hardly surprising.
Remind me never to hire you as political communications director.
“Ok, so when you get this question, you should make an oblique reference to the fact that you might have murdered someone.”
To the OP: My impression is that Hillary has done lots of positive things, and most of the negative things are fairly minor and trumped up beyond belief.
They can’t explain it because it’s not based in reality.
The reality is - she’s never been arrested, tried, convicted or anything.
The reality is - Bill has never been arrested, tried, or convicted of rape.
The reality is - a few women have accused of him rape, but they refused to testify to that effect under oath.
The reality is - one of those women, Juanita Broaddrick, did testify under oath in a deposition, that Bill didn’t rape her.
The reality is - even Ken Starr didn’t think the women in the 90’s were reliable enough to use in his impeachment.
The reality is - there’s no hard evidence that Bill’s raped anyone.
The reality is - criminals are people who are convicted of crimes. Bill and Hillary Clinton are not criminals despite twenty years of conservative efforts to prove otherwise.
And the emails don’t show them actually doing anything untoward. The idea that they were personally pissed at Sanders (who, after all was calling for the DNC head to step down, and remained silent on the Nevada tantrum) yet didn’t act against him, paints them in an even better light.
In a perverse way the batshit crazy allegations have served to immunize her, even against accusations that might even actually hold water. Talk about your unintended consequences.