Elections Democrat 2016 Primary Thread: V2 It's Still Hillary Edition

[IGIT]

Well said. A lot of people have been saying this for a long time. A lot of people both liberal and conservative just don't trust her and is too much of a polished politician and blessed genuine then people would like. I think that's also what cost her against Obama.

hi theBLADE1,

the fact that Hillary is a polished politician doesn't bother me much - what bothers me is her 11th hour scrambling to get to the left of Mr. Sanders.

i think she's inauthentic...but what cost her in her race wasn't the perception that she was untrustworthy, it was rather the string of defections from the Democratic establishment from Clinton to Mr. Obama, which were initiated by Senator Kennedy.

this time, sadly, the Democratic establishment is "all in" on Mrs. Clinton.

- IGIT

 

[wisdom blows]

I want the person to win to be the dem with the best chance of winning the WH, for the simple reason of Supreme Court justices. Hilary for all her flaws is that person.

polls do not show that to be the case.

 

[wisdom blows]

Dems are splitting donations two ways, GOP splitting theirs 6-7 ways. Would be interesting seeing total Dem vs total GOP numbers.

I don't get what the big deal is about 2.5M donations - so your 1M donors made two small donations of $5 a couple of times and that's supposed to be a big deal? If I'm a Hillary donor I should donate a dollar one thousand different times rather than a $1000 one time donation?

Also regarding Hillary vs Bernie - Bernie is basically spending in only three states, whereas Hillary has offices in around 40. Bernie is probably greatly outspending Hillary in Iowa and NH given the amounts both have burned though so far. Bernie is banking on winning NH and being strong in Iowa will open up new revenue streams for him so is basically going all in on them, whereas Hillary is playing the long game already with an eye on organizing for the GE already. If NH wasn't next to Vermont, this race would already be over, but NH is basically home field for Bernie - and will be legitimized with a win there when it isn't really a big deal because he's all but local.

Upstate NY where Hillary lives is also very close to NH, and no, the NH political scene is NOT typical at all. They like Bernie better because of the candidate he is, not because of proximity.

 

[Jack V Savage]

the fact that Hillary is a polished politician doesn't bother me much - what bothers me is her 11th hour scrambling to get to the left of Mr. Sanders.

i think she's inauthentic...but what cost her in her race wasn't the perception that she was untrustworthy, it was rather the string of defections from the Democratic establishment from Clinton to Mr. Obama, which were initiated by Senator Kennedy.

By "inauthentic" you just mean "not an extrovert," right? Seems to me that Clinton has two big obstacles to the fake lefties here: 1. decades of smear jobs from the media (even when an alleged scandal turns out to be fake, people remember the impressions more than the the facts) and 2. general anti-intellectualism. Some people like a candidate like Trump who is having fun out there and saying deliberately offensive stuff. It's more "honest," even though he says stuff that is factually incorrect more than any serious candidate ever has.

 

[Gandhi]

polls do not show that to be the case.

Don't show what to be the case

 

[wisdom blows]

By "inauthentic" you just mean "not an extrovert," right? Seems to me that Clinton has two big obstacles to the fake lefties here: 1. decades of smear jobs from the media (even when an alleged scandal turns out to be fake, people remember the impressions more than the the facts) and 2. general anti-intellectualism. Some people like a candidate like Trump who is having fun out there and saying deliberately offensive stuff. It's more "honest," even though he says stuff that is factually incorrect more than any serious candidate ever has.

3. a spotty record as a "leftist"

 

[wisdom blows]

Don't show what to be the case

That she is the best chance to keep the White House. Bernie polls better against the GOP than she does.

 

[Quipling]

That she is the best chance to keep the White House. Bernie polls better against the GOP than she does.

Not really. He has some polls that are better and some polls that are worse. He had one exceptional poll against trump, but more recent ones suggest that race would be much closer.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/2016_presidential_race.html

 

[IGIT]

hi Jack,

By "inauthentic" you just mean "not an extrovert," right?

no, that is not what i mean. i also have no feel for whether Mrs. Clinton is an introvert or an extrovert.

i feel she's inauthentic, meaning, i don't believe the things that are coming out of her mouth. i take it you do, and that's ok with me.

Seems to me that Clinton has two big obstacles to the fake lefties here:

i am not a fake lefty. people who disagree on your take on Mrs. Clinton are not necessarily fake lefties either.

they just disagree with you.

1. decades of smear jobs from the media (even when an alleged scandal turns out to be fake, people remember the impressions more than the the facts) and

i'm not citing any smear jobs done on Mrs. Clinton by "the media", nor have i in the past.

2. general anti-intellectualism. Some people like a candidate like Trump who is having fun out there and saying deliberately offensive stuff. It's more "honest," even though he says stuff that is factually incorrect more than any serious candidate ever has.

i am not anti-intellectual, nor do gravitate towards candidates who are, essentially, rhetorical bomb throwers....nor do i see myself as one of those "annoying Sanders fanboys", Jack.

i prefer Sanders to Hillary Clinton, although i also believe he has absolutely zero chance of winning the nomination.

- IGIT

 

[Anung Un Rama]

Yeah, those smear jobs really held Clinton back from becoming a 2 term senator of NY, front runner for the Democratic Nomination in '08, Secretary of State, and current front runner for the Democratic nomination.....

It seems the only anti intellectualism and faux leftism affecting Hillary's candidacy is the ignorance of her lies and poor judgement.

You know you're a Hillary Clinton supporter when you defend her authenticity.

How is voting for a guy like Trump, who's rhetoric is obviously resonating within his party, less intellectual than voting for Hillary who has to change or apologize for her positions to resonate with hers?


How is voting for a person who lied about being under sniper fire and made the wrong decision on the most important vote of her life, one that has lead to a million deaths and wasted trillions of dollars commiserate with being an intellectual?

Who is the fake lefty when they defend her even though she voted against gay marriage and for war?

Didn't Hillary's campaign spread photos of Obama dressed in African attire as a way to raise doubts about his Christianity and citizenship? How soon we forget.

 

[theBLADE1]

You don't have to be anti-intellectual to understand that the only reason Hillary Clinton ever does anything is for political gains.

 

[IGIT]

heya AUR,

its time to head out for dinner, but i just wanted to make one, tiny observation.

i think its a fair thing to say that Jack supports Hillary's candidacy in kind of a passive aggressive way. its not flat-out boosterism...its more subtle than that.

anytime there is a charge made against Mrs. Clinton, whether its her neocon foreign policy credentials, her obvious flip flop on the TPP, her faux bona fides as a champion of financial reform, etc, etc, he comes to her defense.

anytime the right leaning posters (or anyone else) attack Sanders, more often than not, Jack keeps his powder dry.

for reasons i don't quite understand, he clearly favors Hillary Clinton over Bernie Sanders. i think he's a good poster and i usually enjoy his tart observations, but i'm mystified by how rarely he has a supportive comment to make about Sanders' run for the nomination.

- IGIT

 

[Jack V Savage]

i think its a fair thing to say that Jack supports Hillary's candidacy in kind of a passive aggressive way. its not flat-out boosterism...its more subtle than that.

It's pretty straightforward, actually. Jack sees both Clinton and Sanders as being decent but flawed candidates with similar platforms and ranks them about the same. To people who are boosters, that sounds like blasphemy. And there is a lot more bullshit spread about Clinton (being the frontrunner) than there is about Sanders. When someone spews bullshit about Sanders, I call them on it, too. Just happens a lot less.

anytime there is a charge made against Mrs. Clinton, whether its her neocon foreign policy credentials, her obvious flip flop on the TPP, her faux bona fides as a champion of financial reform, etc, etc, he comes to her defense.

She doesn't have neocon foreign-policy credentials (to the extent that that terms means anything at all--more often, it's a vague term of abuse). I have commented on opposition to the TPP, which I don't think is well-thought-out. Etc.

anytime the right leaning posters (or anyone else) attack Sanders, more often than not, Jack keeps his powder dry.

Want to bet that I can find at least five recent posts of me disputing dumb attacks on Sanders?

for reasons i don't quite understand, he clearly favors Hillary Clinton over Bernie Sanders. i think he's a good poster and i usually enjoy his tart observations, but i'm mystified by how rarely he has a supportive comment to make about Sanders' run for the nomination.

I've made about as many supportive comments about Sanders as I have about Clinton. Again, neither of them thrills me, but I think they're both pretty decent.

 

[Anung Un Rama]

heya AUR,

its time to head out for dinner, but i just wanted to make one, tiny observation.

i think its a fair thing to say that Jack supports Hillary's candidacy in kind of a passive aggressive way. its not flat-out boosterism...its more subtle than that.

anytime there is a charge made against Mrs. Clinton, whether its her neocon foreign policy credentials, her obvious flip flop on the TPP, her faux bona fides as a champion of financial reform, etc, etc, he comes to her defense.

anytime the right leaning posters (or anyone else) attack Sanders, more often than not, Jack keeps his powder dry.

for reasons i don't quite understand, he clearly favors Hillary Clinton over Bernie Sanders. i think he's a good poster and i usually enjoy his tart observations, but i'm mystified by how rarely he has a supportive comment to make about Sanders' run for the nomination.

- IGIT

IGGY,

You are too kind.

I agree that Jack may seem subtle to the casual observer, but its fairly plain to see, and has been for a long time, that Jack is a Clinton supporter.
Its pretty obvious that he only makes partially positive posts re; Bernie because he's confident that Hillary will win and to cover his ass after I exposed him as a Clinton supporter early on. He wasn't nearly as complimentary of Sanders early on; calling Sanders unrealistic and radical. You can see SouthofMyAnus doing the same thing. If the polls, or even better, the betting lines, were closer he wouldn't be nearly as even handed (which he isn't to begin with). Not only that, he pretends to be a lefty and harasses conservative values while completely and deliberately ignoring Clinton's lies, and her votes on the war, gay rights, her ties to Wall Street, Pharma, the Military Industrial Complex, TPP etc, etc, etc....
One need but look at how heated and aggressively he argues for Clinton's position on TPP.

 

[Jack V Savage]

I agree that Jack may seem subtle to the casual observer, but its fairly plain to see, and has been for a long time, that Jack is a Clinton supporter.

This is literally the dumbest argument I've ever seen here. "You support X." "X is OK." "No you love X!" "Um, OK." And then follow me around and keep posting it.

Its pretty obvious that he only makes partially positive posts re; Bernie because he's confident that Hillary will win and to cover his ass after I exposed him as a Clinton supporter early on.

How does that make any sense to you? Part of supporting someone is, you know, supporting them. There's no reason to hide it.

He wasn't nearly as complimentary of Sanders early on; calling Sanders unrealistic and radical.

And I assume you have evidence to back that up, like all your dishonest character attacks, right? No? Oh. In fact, I was much harsher on Clinton earlier on and more of a Sanders supporter.

You can see SouthofMyAnus doing the same thing. If the polls, or even better, the betting lines, were closer he wouldn't be nearly as even handed (which he isn't to begin with). Not only that, he pretends to be a lefty and harasses conservative values while completely and deliberately ignoring Clinton's lies, and her votes on the war, gay rights, her ties to Wall Street, Pharma, the Military Industrial Complex, TPP etc, etc, etc....
One need but look at how heated and aggressively he argues for Clinton's position on TPP.

LOL! You're such a liar, Anung.

 

[theBLADE1]

My problem is with people writing off Bernie Sanders like he has absolutely zero chance to win. Nobody has a crystal ball and a lot of people like to ignore the groundswell that Sanders has behind him just because of current polling data and "Vegas odds"

I think it's also a little annoying that this thread is titled "it's still Hillary edition". So many people in this forum are going to shit their pants .when the actual voting results come in.

 

[Anung Un Rama]

Jack is Hillary Clinton antiestablishment?
Did Hillary Clinton advocate for TPP 45 times?
Did Hillary Clinton lie about landing under sniper fire?
Did Hillary Clinton vote against gay marriage?
Did Hillary Clinton vote for the Iraq War?
Did Hillary Clinton vote for the Bankruptcy Reform Act?
Did Hillary Clinton support NAFTA?
Did Hillary Clinton champion the "touch on crime" crusade?
Is Hillary Clinton leading all candidates with donations from Pharma?
Is Hillary Clinton leading all candidates with donations from Wall Street?
Is Hillary Clinton leading all candidates with donations from the MIC?
Is Hillary Clinton leading all but 2 candidates with donations from Big Oil?

Does that sound like a progressive to you?

Has she backpedaled on gay marriage, the Iraq war, crime, TPP?

Isn't it to become more appealing to her base so she could win a election?

How can you question the intellectual honestly of anybody who feels she is a phony?
How can you defend her for infinity without conceding to any of these facts and call others "fake lefties"?

Unless you're a Clinton shill and an absolute phony?

 

[Lead]

I'm telling you this race is far from over. The winner of the Democratic primaries are not decided in January.

http://www.examiner.com/article/ber...creating-a-hillary-clinton-nightmare-scenario

I think it will be the biggest political upset and history. Even more so than Obama beating Hillary.

I wouldn't say he's surging. Hillary still leads in Iowa and national polls. Since last NH poll is up with him leading but that's the state people think he can win. If Hillary came out of the first two states 1-1, I would say they did what they needed to in order to not cause any panic. The next states get far less white after that.

 

[Quipling]

I wouldn't say he's surging. Hillary still leads in Iowa and national polls. Since last NH poll is up with him leading but that's the state people think he can win. If Hillary came out of the first two states 1-1, I would say they did what they needed to in order to not cause any panic. The next states get far less white after that.

He's not even surging anymore.
http://i.imgur.com/fWzmkgT.png

 

[theBLADE1]

I wouldn't say he's surging. Hillary still leads in Iowa and national polls. Since last NH poll is up with him leading but that's the state people think he can win. If Hillary came out of the first two states 1-1, I would say they did what they needed to in order to not cause any panic. The next states get far less white after that.

You might not say surging but others would. It is certainly not impossible for Sanders to win in Iowa and if he does then all bets are off. People pretending that he doesn't have a chance are fooling themselves.

May I ask who you're voting for lead?