How bad a choice Hillary was

[Unitedwestand13]

That is part of it. But the Clintons have spent a substantial part of the last two years trying to create headlines, so it's not all on the media's obsession with them. They're still trying to take the spotlight.

The Clintons are politically ambitious individuals and if I criticized everyone who was politically ambitious I would be criticizing anyone who sought political office.

 

[Amelia]

You mean she'll only get two million more votes?

Won't do her any good to get two million more votes if Democrats lose Wisconsin again.

 

[Chillfolks]

Please list the influential positions the Clintons currently hold.

You are misguided in the notion one must hold a position to be influential.

 

[Amelia]

The Clintons are politically ambitious individuals and if I criticized everyone who was politically ambitious I would be criticizing anyone who sought political office.

With greater power comes greater responsibility.

 

[Carleen]

The Clintons.

*facepalm*

If you won't even bother to keep up with the topic of the thread, then this really is hopeless.

Goodbye.

Oh please I did keep up. You just didn’t agree with me. That’s okay. That is what debate is all about. You have a nice evening and keep debating!

 

[Vadinho]

My husband said he would never vote for Trump. Every month or two as the dramatic 2015-2016 general election season unfolded I would ask him again to make sure he was still never Trump. Sure enough. No way no how.

And then suddenly, he was absolutely going to vote for Trump because the alternative would be voting for Hillary and that left him no choice except Trump. He wouldn't go third party. He wouldn't stay home. He wouldn't vote Hillary. That left only Trump. Maybe he would have voted for the Democrat if Republicans still picked Trump and Democrats had anyone else other than Hillary.

That is why I want Hillary to go away and let the rest of the world move on. For the love of humanity, Secretary Clinton, get out of the way so Trump and the Trumpsters won't have you to use to fire up enthusiasm. ... and so we can come up with someone viable to beat him. Please do not turn the next general election into a Hillary circus. Let the new people, whoever they are, duke it out in the primary season and find a way to earn media attention for themselves as something other than the B story to your storyline.

Please.

This type of reasoning was founded upon impressions of Hillary that were formed by decades of political pressure and media scrutiny of Hillary and her husband. As the wife of a President, she was tied to his hip as women everywhere seem to be sentenced. At no time did she ever merit these accusations or vitriol. She was simply an intelligent and ambitious woman who did not suffer fools gladly and made her way among the testosterone laden world she wanted to lead. Of all the political figures in the last 40 years, she alone was particularly hated for reasons that no one can substantiate. Every fault someone attributed to her would have been a feather in the cap for any man in similar instances. She was the most intelligent person in the room for most of her life and men hated her for it. What is astounding is that women also hated her for her sheer intellect and audacity. How dare she pretend to be the equal of a man? How dare she become President when we can choose a con man without an ounce of integrity and lacking any intellectual capacity whatsoever. How dare this extraordinary woman, this human being, think she could become President? Anyone else was preferable, even a moron grifter that lies and cheats and knows nothing.

 

[Carjosse]

You are misguided in the notion one must hold a position to be influential.

So then how exactly are the Clintons exerting so much influence on national policy?

 

[Hawkeye10]

For the Thread:

Paglia

As for Hillary, she’s pretty much damaged goods, but her perpetual, sniping, pity-me tour shows no signs of abating. She still has a rabidly loyal following, but it’s hard to imagine her winning the nomination again, with her iron grip on the Democratic National Committee now gone. Still, it’s in her best interest to keep the speculation fires burning. Given how thoroughly she has already sabotaged the rising candidates by hogging the media spotlight, I suspect she wants Trump to win again. I don’t see our stumbling, hacking, shop-worn Evita yielding the spotlight willingly to any younger gal.

https://spectator.us/camille-paglia-hillary-trump/

Love this:

We’re back to the hypocrisy sweepstakes, where gestures of virtue are as formalized as kabuki. Humor has been assassinated. An off word at work or school will get you booted to the gallows. This is the graveyard of liberalism, whose once noble ideals have turned spectral and vampiric.

 

[Chillfolks]

So then how exactly are the Clintons exerting so much influence on national policy?

Speaking tours, campaigning for like minded people, TV interviews, the same way many other people influence policies who don't hold office.

Is the concept of someone being influential without holding office new to you?

 

[Amelia]

This type of reasoning was founded upon impressions of Hillary that were formed by decades of political pressure and media scrutiny of Hillary and her husband. As the wife of a President, she was tied to his hip as women everywhere seem to be sentenced. At no time did she ever merit these accusations or vitriol. She was simply an intelligent and ambitious woman who did not suffer fools gladly and made her way among the testosterone laden world she wanted to lead. Of all the political figures in the last 40 years, she alone was particularly hated for reasons that no one can substantiate. Every fault someone attributed to her would have been a feather in the cap for any man in similar instances. She was the most intelligent person in the room for most of her life and men hated her for it. What is astounding is that women also hated her for her sheer intellect and audacity. How dare she pretend to be the equal of a man? How dare she become President when we can choose a con man without an ounce of integrity and lacking any intellectual capacity whatsoever. How dare this extraordinary woman, this human being, think she could become President? Anyone else was preferable, even a moron grifter that lies and cheats and knows nothing.

Whatever the reasoning, they gave us Trump. And they don't have the grace to say, "Gosh, we want to do everything we can to not help Trump get reelected". Bill Clinton and Hillary are both drags on the party in the Me Too and Believe Her era. That is just one way that they hurt Democratic prospects going forward. They didn't have the savvy needed to beat Donald Trump (well, Bill may have but Hillary ignored his advice) but they should still have the savvy to know that it is time to step aside and let a new generation have a chance to fill the news feeds.

 

[Unitedwestand13]

The only reason why Clinton’s name is back in the news cycle is because of a wall Street Journal opinion piece written by mark penn and Andrew stein. I don’t know who andrew stein is but mark penn was Clinton’s campaign manager in her 2008 run at the nomination.

Why are we treating a opinion piece by two 90s relics as gospel?

 

[Chillfolks]

Whatever the reasoning, they gave us Trump. And they don't have the grace to say, "Gosh, we want to do everything we can to not help Trump get reelected". Bill Clinton and Hillary are both drags on the party in the Me Too and Believe Her era. That is just one way that they hurt Democratic prospects going forward. They didn't have the savvy needed to beat Donald Trump (well, Bill may have but Hillary ignored his advice) but they should still have the savvy to know that it is time to step aside and let a new generation have a chance to fill the news feeds.

They have the savvy to know what's best but it is overiden by an ego preventing then from stepping back

 

[Hawkeye10]

The only reason why Clinton’s name is back in the news cycle is because of a wall Street Journal opinion piece written by mark penn and Andrew stein. I don’t know who andrew stein is but mark penn was Clinton’s campaign manager in her 2008 run at the nomination.

Why are we treating a opinion piece by two 90s relics as gospel?

No, the reason we are talking about Hillary is that she has one again failed to do the right thing for this nation, in this case shutting up and sitting down, and giving someone who has a chance in Hell of being successful a chance.

 

[Vadinho]

Whatever the reasoning, they gave us Trump. And they don't have the grace to say, "Gosh, we want to do everything we can to not help Trump get reelected". Bill Clinton and Hillary are both drags on the party in the Me Too and Believe Her era. That is just one way that they hurt Democratic prospects going forward. They didn't have the savvy needed to beat Donald Trump (well, Bill may have but Hillary ignored his advice) but they should still have the savvy to know that it is time to step aside and let a new generation have a chance to fill the news feeds.

I agree that they need to retire from public life. But the fact that reasonable people hated her so much that they were forced to vote for Trump is unforgivable. I strongly recommend public, private and social humiliation of all Trump voters. The only tool we have left is shame and those who voted for him should feel the rage of all of us. There is no get out of jail free card for those voters. They are responsible for this stain upon our nation.

 

[Mithrae]

That is why I want Hillary to go away and let the rest of the world move on. For the love of humanity, Secretary Clinton, get out of the way so Trump and the Trumpsters won't have you to use to fire up enthusiasm. ... and so we can come up with someone viable to beat him. Please do not turn the next general election into a Hillary circus. Let the new people, whoever they are, duke it out in the primary season and find a way to earn media attention for themselves as something other than the B story to your storyline.

You mean the basket of deplorables? Pretty sure that kind of attitude was one (of the many) reasons for the 2016 outcome too. Partisanship, tribalism, name-calling and shaming... who's got the edge in that game, I wonder? It's completely antithetical to core liberal values, but meat and drink to nationalists and many evangelicals. Amazingly over the past decade or two (not surprisingly, correlating with the increasing dominance of liberal policies in the social sphere) these behaviours, especially shaming and name-calling, have become hallmarks more of so-called SJWs, Hollywood 'liberal elites' and their ilk more than anyone else, but I'd guess that most liberals still despise such behaviour. (Edit: Irony alert after reading the post above.)

For my two cents your next D candidate has got to show that they intend to be more than just a president for half the country; and as a corollary to that, has got to show that they respect Donald Trump as your country's president too, if he's still around.

If they happen to have an aunty named Jehosheba so much the better - might even get some of those evangelicals on board :lol:



Anyways, I happened to watch this again just a couple of weeks ago (after responding in another thread to someone pouring contempt on Trump and his supporters), and it seems particularly appropriate in this thread:

 

[Mycroft]

I'm not a Dem. Try again. For the 100th time.

I was a Republican until November 2015 when the GOP made clear they were willing to sell their soul to the devil Trump. You would probably have lost my husband also if the Democrats had run anyone but Hillary. He voted against Scott Walker this November. You Trumpsters are hanging on by a thread. Good luck to you.

If you voted for Hillary, you might as well be a Dem.

 

[Lursa]

My husband said he would never vote for Trump. Every month or two as the dramatic 2015-2016 general election season unfolded I would ask him again to make sure he was still never Trump. Sure enough. No way no how.

And then suddenly, he was absolutely going to vote for Trump because the alternative would be voting for Hillary and that left him no choice except Trump. He wouldn't go third party. He wouldn't stay home. He wouldn't vote Hillary. That left only Trump. Maybe he would have voted for the Democrat if Republicans still picked Trump and Democrats had anyone else other than Hillary.

That is why I want Hillary to go away and let the rest of the world move on. For the love of humanity, Secretary Clinton, get out of the way so Trump and the Trumpsters won't have you to use to fire up enthusiasm. ... and so we can come up with someone viable to beat him. Please do not turn the next general election into a Hillary circus. Let the new people, whoever they are, duke it out in the primary season and find a way to earn media attention for themselves as something other than the B story to your storyline.

Please.

See bold: blind rigid bias is no excuse. American voters have a responsibility to choose the best candidate, not 'hate' one or another so much that they cant distinguish reality from facts. Or fall for alot of Russian spam. Many American voted Trump because of an irrational hatred of Hillary.

It's sad that those were the 2 candidates we ended up with. Neither was a solid candidate for that office. But it was obvious that Trump was lying his ass off and had no clue HOW he'd do any of the things he promised. And that's been pretty much true. People voted for him because they were sick of the govt 'as usual' and/or they hated Hillary. Or they were just plain stupid.

Hillary WOULD have just been more of the same, I agree. But when it comes to our country sustaining all kinds of damage...internally, external threats, economically, etc etc etc, she wouldnt have made it worse, she would have been more 'business as usual,' and that's not what anyone wanted either.

There comes a time when adults face up to unpleasant decisions and look at realities. Both candidates sucked but one was by far worse. But hey, better to vote for him than "Killery,' or whatever other ridiculousness people associate with her, just out of spite...or really pathetically misguided hope. We'd have had 4 more years to figure out a better way to compromise and find better candidates. Not a great solution but better than cutting your nose off to spite your face.

Here's another thing for us adults to face up to: sometimes it takes really hard lessons for people to learn stuff. And stupider people take more than one tough lesson.

 

[Amelia]

Possibly my position is the most ironic of anyone in the thread. Without having a great deal of respect for Hillary, and while pissed at her for being such a bad candidate that she lost to Donald Effing Trump, I keep hoping that she will show her worthiness after all by putting the nation's interests ahead of her own.

So I continue to be let down each time she shows she's not willing to do that.

 

[Mycroft]

That's funny since you guys chose the criminal, foul-mouth, cheating, non family value man like Trump. You have NO room to talk about ANYTHING con. :lamo

The thing is, we have direct evidence about what Hillary is. With Trump, all you have is spin, speculation, innuendo, hyperbole...and some outright lies.

 

[Amelia]

If you voted for Hillary, you might as well be a Dem.

I didn't.

But that won't stop you from calling me a Democrat a few hundred more times, will it.

 

[Lursa]

Possibly my position is the most ironic of anyone in the thread. Without having a great deal of respect for Hillary, and while pissed at her for being such a bad candidate that she lost to Donald Effing Trump, I keep hoping that she will show her worthiness after all by putting the nation's interests ahead of her own.

So I continue to be let down each time she shows she's not willing to do that.

I agree she needs to get the hell off the political stage. She wasnt a great candidate to begin with. Unfortunately, we had little to no other choices.

But I dont think she's serious about running in the future...from what I see, 90% of the reason Hillary's name comes up is when Trump ****s up and people try to compare it to what Hiilary "would have done." :roll: They are still using her as a scapegoat, saying, "see, Trump is better" (implied: because Hillary would have been worse, not because Trump is ****). They'll never admit to making a bad decision with The Donald and Hillary will always be their scapegoat.

 

[Keridan]

I just can't see Clinton getting the nomination again. I know that primaries are pretty much decided by the most partisan sect of each party and that is her wheelhouse, but those same people are the ones who hate Trump with such a passion they would sacrifice their pets if they thought it would get him out of office.

Unfortunately, there is no end in sight to the trend of picking the most extreme candidate in primaries as long as independents don't get a stronger voice in them. Dems need to choose a well-spoken, reasoned candidate who doesn't have all kinds of shady history out of the gate. With millions in the party and tens of thousands active in politics it ought to be possible to find this combination. Especially when you realize the babble about gender and race don't actually impact elections like they once did.

The smartest move would also be to avoid mentioning Trump at all during the election. Independents who decide the elections are actually interested in policy more than frothing hatred and enough people are all over him that the candidate could never say his name and everyone else would cover bringing him down. They could use that energy to offer goals.

 

[Carjosse]

Speaking tours, campaigning for like minded people, TV interviews, the same way many other people influence policies who don't hold office.

Is the concept of someone being influential without holding office new to you?

So they have the same influence as pretty much any former presidential couple. What exactly is wrong with that? If George W. Bush gives an interview do you call that harming America?

 

[Chillfolks]

So they have the same influence as pretty much any former presidential couple. What exactly is wrong with that? If George W. Bush gives an interview do you call that harming America?

If W was giving interviews encouraging people the throw out civility in dealing with people of opposing opinions Yes I would.

 

[Carjosse]

If W was giving interviews encouraging people the throw out civility in dealing with people of opposing opinions Yes I would.

Give me examples of the Clintons doing that. Both Bushs opposed and have spoken against Trump and his administration too.