• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Bartiromo booed for praising Hillary's 'impressive resume'...

MickeyW

MickeyW

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 10, 2015
Messages
14,012
Reaction score
3,439
Location
Southern Oregon
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Hillary does have an impressive resume on paper. No one can deny her experience. The question is whether her experience and policies are good for the country or bad for the country. One could make the argument that if all of her experience wound up being failure after failure after failure, then someone with zero experience might be better for the job than her. In the end, as someone once said, "Are you better off than you were four years ago (or eight)"? While obviously not everyone would have the same answer I think, generally speaking, most would answer no, whether you were rich or whether you were poor or you were in the middle class or you were a minority. Is the world and the US's standing in it better off than four years or eight years ago? If the solution to the poor's economic troubles is to raise the minimum wage to $15 per hour, how does that speak for what the Obama administration has done for the economy over the last eight years? Hillary's policies aren't too different than Obama's.
 
Lawyer, carpetbagging Senator, ineffectual Secretary of state. How is that impressive?

Ben Carson - surgeon
Trump - business mogul
Fiorina - tech CEO

Those are impressive resumes. Everyone else are just typical lawyer/politicians
 
Last edited:
MickeyW said:
Fox Business Network moderator Maria Bartiromo was briefly booed by a Republican-friendly debate crowd Tuesday night when she brought up former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's résumé.

Maria Bartiromo booed citing Hillary Clinton's résumé - Business Insider



I guess she does if you want to call a lifetime of lies, and crooked dealings, impressive.
Click to expand...

You do realize the reference to Hillary's impressive resume was to draw Marco out to reflect on his words. Marco is the one that conceded Hillary's resume was impressive. Maria was just drawing on that reference for discussion...

Marco Rubio: Hillary Clinton's governement record is longer than any Republican candidate - true? - newsnet5.com Cleveland

Especially as it will most assuredly will be a part of a Hillary campaign ad should the race be between Rubio and Clinton.
 
jonny5 said:
Ad hominem.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure you understand what add Ad Hominem means.

An add Ad Hominem is a personal attack designed to bolster an argument. "eg.. I'm right because you're an idiot". It's a logical fallacy. An argument doesn't become wrong or right because someone is an idiot. You can be 100% right and totally ignorant. You can be 100% wrong and totally informed.

Asking how your resume compares to Ms. Clinton’s isn't a personal attack. It's contrast. No on on this board has anything approaching her resume. Like her or not, she's been one of the most influential and powerful people on this planet. So when you make a comment suggesting that what she's accomplished is no big deal, then it is fair game to ask you what you think constitutes an impressive life's work.
 
Mithros said:
I'm not sure you understand what add Ad Hominem means.

An add Ad Hominem is a personal attack designed to bolster an argument. "eg.. I'm right because you're an idiot". It's a logical fallacy. An argument doesn't become wrong or right because someone is an idiot. You can be 100% right and totally ignorant. You can be 100% wrong and totally informed.

Asking how your resume compares to Ms. Clinton’s isn't a personal attack. It's contrast. No on on this board has anything approaching her resume. Like her or not, she's been one of the most influential and powerful people on this planet. So when you make a comment suggesting that what she's accomplished is no big deal, then it is fair game to ask you what you think constitutes an impressive life's work.
Click to expand...

He didnt though. He attacked my own resume instead of my position on Clintons.

ad hominem - an argument directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining

slyfox696 said:
How many of those have you accomplished?
Click to expand...

Case closed.
 
tres borrachos said:
Hillary does have an impressive resume. BFD.
Click to expand...

It's all on paper....but she has never actually accomplished anything in her entire career....except to allow people to die and allow Bill to womanize and rape.

The criminality of those two is beyond the pale.
 
MickeyW said:
Fox Business Network moderator Maria Bartiromo was briefly booed by a Republican-friendly debate crowd Tuesday night when she brought up former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's résumé.

Maria Bartiromo booed citing Hillary Clinton's résumé - Business Insider



I guess she does if you want to call a lifetime of lies, and crooked dealings, impressive.
Click to expand...

If there was a republican with a resume as long as Hillary's, conservatives would laugh at anyone trying to suggest it wasn't impressive.
 
jonny5 said:
Ad hominem.
Click to expand...
No it's not. Please review the meaning of logical fallacies before you erroneously insert them into a discussion.
jonny5 said:
He didnt though. He attacked my own resume instead of my position on Clintons.
Click to expand...
No I didn't. I didn't attack your resume, I pointed out the absurdity of your position on Clinton's by comparing the two. Unless you are far more accomplished than any of us realize, you saying her resume isn't impressive is rather silly, even if you don't think she was particularly good at any of her jobs. The fact is Clinton has done things in politics far beyond what most people have ever done, so for you to legitimately claim it isn't impressive, we would have to know how much grander your accomplishments are or to be given some evidence that what she has accomplished is a common thing for people to accomplish.

So, as I asked before, how many of those things have you accomplished, which would lead you to claim it is not impressive?
 
Last edited:
roughdraft274 said:
If there was a republican with a resume as long as Hillary's, conservatives would laugh at anyone trying to suggest it wasn't impressive.
Click to expand...

Her resume is long....I'm not saying it isn't. But it's all on paper....her accomplishments are ZERO!

In short, her resume doesn't reflect her ineptitude, loathing of the Secret Service... and smoke and mirrors. It certainly doesn't reflect her criminality!
 
Slyfox696 said:
No it's not. Please review the meaning of logical fallacies before you erroneously insert them into a discussion.
No I didn't. I didn't attack your resume, I pointed out the absurdity of your position on Clinton's by comparing the two. Unless you are far more accomplished than any of us realize, you saying her resume isn't impressive is rather silly, even if you don't think she was particularly good at any of her jobs. The fact is Clinton has done things in politics far beyond what most people have ever done, so for you to legitimately claim it isn't impressive, we would have to know how much grander your accomplishments are or to be given some evidence that what she has accomplished is a common thing for people to accomplish.

So, as I asked before, how many of those things have you accomplished, which would lead you to claim it is not impressive?
Click to expand...

What has she actually accomplished, that has benefited America?
 
MickeyW said:
Her resume is long....I'm not saying it isn't. But it's all on paper....her accomplishments are ZERO!

In short, her resume doesn't reflect her ineptitude, loathing of the Secret Service... and smoke and mirrors. It certainly doesn't reflect her criminality!
Click to expand...

Her resume is impressive, you just don't like anything she's done because you don't like her politics. Lets at least be honest about this. It's fine for you to say that her policies are bad or that she hasn't done a good job on any of her previous jobs, but it's just plain stupid to pretend that her resume isn't impressive. I have to interview engineers sometimes at my company. If I have a guy come in and his resume reads "20 years experince in this industry, ran multiple groups over the years on these large projects at these chemical plants" and on and on, I would look like an idiot if I went to my boss and said "It's just not an impressive resume". If I don't want the guy hired then I should instead say "he's headed alot of projects, but they've had numerous problems, he's never been at one company very long" etc.

You're conflating you not liking her politics with her actual resume.
 
roughdraft274 said:
Her resume is impressive, you just don't like anything she's done because you don't like her politics. Lets at least be honest about this. It's fine for you to say that her policies are bad or that she hasn't done a good job on any of her previous jobs, but it's just plain stupid to pretend that her resume isn't impressive. I have to interview engineers sometimes at my company. If I have a guy come in and his resume reads "20 years experince in this industry, ran multiple groups over the years on these large projects at these chemical plants" and on and on, I would look like an idiot if I went to my boss and said "It's just not an impressive resume". If I don't want the guy hired then I should instead say "he's headed alot of projects, but they've had numerous problems, he's never been at one company very long" etc.

You're conflating you not liking her politics with her actual resume.
Click to expand...

Sight some examples of her accomplishments, that have actually benefited America.

If you can find any, then weigh her history of lying, deceit and outrageous temper tantrums, against that resume.

In your example, if that engineer had indeed accomplished all those projects to the satisfaction of most, would you still hire him if several people said that he was a lying, deceitful person, with a bad temper?

Furthermore, Hillary has demonstrated many times over how much she hates the military, the SS, the police and the average American, unless of course she can gain power, control and money from them.
She panders to whatever group she is smooozing at the time, including using Black or Southern accent in her speeches....

All of that, should be part of her resume....

And one more thing....The Clinton Foundation is a "front" for bilking more and more fools out of their money.
 
Last edited:
There's nothing wrong with mentioning that Hillary's resume on paper looks inpressive when you realize the phenomonon of "Kicked Upstairs".

•Another example involving the American presidency: Andrew Jackson supposedly said of his appointment of James Buchanan as minister to Russia: "It was as far as I could send him out of my sight, and where he could do the least harm. I would have sent him to the North Polenote where no human being had ever been at the time; in modern terms it's more or less equivalent to "I would have sent him to Mars" if we had kept a minister there." Unfortunately Buchanan's constant Kicked Upstairs status gave people the impression that he had extensive experience in politics. Instead of getting kicked out of politics altogether like he should have been, he eventually became one of the worst Presidents in American history.
Click to expand...
Hillary Clinton has been a spectacular failure in her entire political career but when you're married to a governor and then a president, it affords her many opportunities to screw up.
 
Perhaps we should have these debates without an audience in the building.
 
Slyfox696 said:
No it's not. Please review the meaning of logical fallacies before you erroneously insert them into a discussion.
No I didn't. I didn't attack your resume, I pointed out the absurdity of your position on Clinton's by comparing the two. Unless you are far more accomplished than any of us realize, you saying her resume isn't impressive is rather silly, even if you don't think she was particularly good at any of her jobs. The fact is Clinton has done things in politics far beyond what most people have ever done, so for you to legitimately claim it isn't impressive, we would have to know how much grander your accomplishments are or to be given some evidence that what she has accomplished is a common thing for people to accomplish.

So, as I asked before, how many of those things have you accomplished, which would lead you to claim it is not impressive?
Click to expand...

Ad hominem. Feel free to leave me out of the discussion and we can continue.
 
jonny5 said:
Ad hominem. Feel free to leave me out of the discussion and we can continue.
Click to expand...
I'm not talking about you, I'm discussion your position. However, your position can only be maintained by providing one of two things; either you provide your great credentials or provide evidence that Hillary's resume is fairly common. We can throw out the last one because we both know the list of people who have been lawyer, First Lady, Senator, Secretary of State and leading Presidential candidate is limited to 1, so the only other possibility for you to legitimately claim her resume isn't impressive is for you to have a far more impressive political resume.

So, as I said, how many of those things have you accomplished? And, as I said, please learn the meanings of logical fallacies before you erroneously deploy them in a conversation.
 
Slyfox696 said:
provide evidence that Hillary's resume is fairly common. We can throw out the last one because we both know the list of people who have been lawyer, First Lady, Senator, Secretary of State and leading Presidential candidate is limited to 1
Click to expand...

The number of people who have been lawyers, senators, and bureaucrats is long. Which is why her resume isnt impressive. The fact that she didnt even accomplish anything with those positions, makes it even less so. The only thing impressive about Hillary is that she climbed so far for no real reason.
 
jonny5 said:
The number of people who have been lawyers, senators, and bureaucrats is long.
Click to expand...
But that's not her resume. Her resume is lawyer, First Lady, Senator (which is not a long list, despite your claim to the contrary), Secretary of State (again, a very short list) and leading Presidential candidate.

Her resume is literally one of a kind. How do I know this? Because you cannot name me a single other person who has done it. And if you don't think having a one of a kind resume, holding some of the most prestigious jobs in politics, is impressive, then you need to show us your greater accomplishments. Otherwise, your post just appears as little more than blatant partisanship.

Which is why her resume isnt impressive.
Click to expand...
Name one other person who has done what she has done. You can't. And she's held some of the most respected and prestigious jobs in government and she's leading the race for the most prestigious job in government. That's impressive, whether you like her politics or agree with her effectiveness or not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom