We are here today with Roe gone, AA gone, and Citizens United because Hillary received $250,000 for a Wall Street speech.

[samiam5211]

First, you ignored the topic, which is that your excuse for Hillary would also apply to trump, dodging that. Second, you are creating a straw man about Hillary's flaws. It wasn't about her tolerating idiots.

It wasn't an excuse.

The public sould have realized that Hillary was the most qualified person to ever run for the office. Her not having a good personality should have been overlooked by a proper member of a Republic.

Instead they voted for an obvious lifelong liar who appealed to racism.

That isn't on Trump or Hillary. it's on us.

 

[venice_ca]

Whether it was or not, she was well under a bar that wasn't higher as well. Again, can you blame voters? Yes, partly. Can you blame her? Yes, partly.

Cambridge Analytica.

How soon some forget.

And CA was interested in voters who had been hostile to President Obama, among other things.

But let’s blame the woman.

 

[Craig234]

It wasn't an excuse.

Yes, it was. Your responses are largely just denials. If I say you typed the letter "e" in "excuse", you say you didn't.

The public sould have realized that Hillary was the most qualified person to ever run for the office. Her not having a good personality should have been overlooked by a proper member of a Republic.

You badly misunderstand the issue. It's not that people didn't think she was experienced, and it's mostly not her personality outside of how that affects how she would govern. People DID make a terrible mistake who picked trump, but you show you don't understand her problems.

 

[Craig234]

Cambridge Analytica.

How soon some forget.

And CA was interested in voters who had been hostile to President Obama, among other things.

But let’s blame the woman.

Why is it so hard to understand both are true, issues with Cambridge Analytica and flaws with Hillary? That's where 'playing the sexism card' is wrong. It has a place to be played, but it's not the whole story.

 

[samiam5211]

Yes, it was. Your responses are largely just denials. If I say you typed the letter "e" in "excuse", you say you didn't.



You badly misunderstand the issue. It's not that people didn't think she was experienced, and it's mostly not her personality outside of how that affects how she would govern. People DID make a terrible mistake who picked trump, but you show you don't understand her problems.

Yea, the people had terrible judgement.

We need to do better.

 

[Craig234]

Yea, the people had terrible judgement.

And Hillary's was pretty bad also. Finding Qadafi's torture hilarious, supporting a corrupt coup in Honduras, continuing big money Wall Street speeches, arranging for the DNC to wrongly boost her campaign, and various other things she did.

We need to do better.

We do. And we did then, electing Bernie.

 

[venice_ca]

Why is it so hard to understand both are true, issues with Cambridge Analytica and flaws with Hillary? That's where 'playing the sexism card' is wrong. It has a place to be played, but it's not the whole story.

Cambridge Analytica concentrated their work on very specific districts in swing states, on very specific demographics, and with very specific rhetoric. There was more than appeals to sexism involved, and you certainly know that if you know anything about CA and their role in the 2016 election.

 

[Craig234]

Cambridge Analytica concentrated their work on very specific districts in swing states, on very specific demographics, and with very specific rhetoric. There was more than appeals to sexism involved, and you certainly know that if you know anything about CA and their role in the 2016 election.

Yes. And you seemed to be arguing that Cambridge Analytica left Hillary without any flaws. You concluded your post with "but let's blame the woman", which doesn't have much more than sexism.

 

[samiam5211]

And Hillary's was pretty bad also. Finding Qadafi's torture hilarious, supporting a corrupt coup in Honduras, continuing big money Wall Street speeches, arranging for the DNC to wrongly boost her campaign, and various other things she did.


We do. And we did then, electing Bernie.

Hillary is no longer in the picture.

The same public that elected Trump is still out there.

 

[venice_ca]

Yes. And you seemed to be arguing that Cambridge Analytica left Hillary without any flaws. You concluded your post with "but let's blame the woman", which doesn't have much more than sexism.

Yes, blaming the woman instead of Cambridge Analytica, the company that was passed information from Facebook activity, something that wasn’t supposed to happen, but did.

Without CA’s heavy thumb on the scale, those swing states would have shown different results. We’re still vulnerable to similar campaign tactics, but let’s wave our hands about and point at Hillary when Bernie or whoever would have been just as vulnerable to targeted propaganda.

 

[Craig234]

Hillary is no longer in the picture.

So, you want to ban discussion of history? After making your arguments about it?

 

[Craig234]

Yes, blaming the woman instead of Cambridge Analytica, the company that was passed information from Facebook activity, something that wasn’t supposed to happen, but did.

Without CA’s heavy thumb on the scale, those swing states would have shown different results. We’re still vulnerable to similar campaign tactics, but let’s wave our hands about and point at Hillary when Bernie or whoever would have been just as vulnerable to targeted propaganda.

This is pretty ridiculous. There are many, many things to 'blame'. Cambridge Analytica, James Comey, the Russian disinformation operation, John Podesta clicking on a bad link, right-wing dark money, right-wing media, Bill Clinton's affairs, and much more. And bad things about her. One on the list doesn't erase her flaws.

We can agree all day about Cambridge Analytica, but not that it made her blameless. Bernie would have been a big target of targeted propaganda, but he was the most liked candidate in modern history and she the least after trump, which matters regardless of the propaganda.

 

[samiam5211]

So, you want to ban discussion of history? After making your arguments about it?

The point is that the problem then was the public and we have that same problem now.

It's your obsession with blaming Hillary that is a denial of history.

Some of that public is flirting with Robert Kennedy this time around too. I suppose the votes that get wasted in him will be Biden's fault, or his fault, and not the part of the public just being terrible at picking a leader.

 

[Craig234]

The point is that the problem then was the public and we have that same problem now.

It's your obsession with blaming Hillary that is a denial of history.

Some of that public is flirting with Robert Kennedy this time around too. I suppose the votes that get wasted in him will be Biden's fault, or his fault, and not the part of the public just being terrible at picking a leader.

The public was part of the problem then and still is. It's your obsession with NOT blaming Hillary for her part that is a denial of history. No, you don't get to make yet another wild attempt to defend Hillary by equating her situation and Biden's. What do polls say about arrogance being a flaw of Biden? Is he off doing big money speeches to Wall Street, or other things she did?

 

[venice_ca]

This is pretty ridiculous. There are many, many things to 'blame'. Cambridge Analytica, James Comey, the Russian disinformation operation, John Podesta clicking on a bad link, right-wing dark money, right-wing media, Bill Clinton's affairs, and much more. And bad things about her. One on the list doesn't erase her flaws.

We can agree all day about Cambridge Analytica, but not that it made her blameless. Bernie would have been a big target of targeted propaganda, but he was the most liked candidate in modern history and she the least after trump, which matters regardless of the propaganda.

Had Bernie received the nomination, his own mother wouldn’t have recognized him from the BS that would have been circulated about him.

There was not a single Democratic candidate who would not have been subjected to attacks, or spared mud flung in their direction. Coming off of eight years of President Obama, and all the lies fling against him and his administration, the right were determined to take back the White House. If a racist and bigoted candidate was to be their means, they didn’t care.

I worked with staunch GOPers who liked Bernie — they wouldn’t have voted for him because of taxes cuts they wanted, and eventually received.

I voted for Bernie in the 2016 California primary, but he had his faults and vulnerabilities. I’m not blind to the reality of partisan politics, and if Republicans saw higher taxes, more regulation with a Bernie presidency, there would have been no attack too low. The image of a socialist picking the pocket of honest [white] workers to give to others [POC] would have made Lee Atwater smile.

 

[Craig234]

Had Bernie received the nomination, his own mother wouldn’t have recognized him from the BS that would have been circulated about him.

There was not a single Democratic candidate who would not have been subjected to attacks, or spared mud flung in their direction. Coming off of eight years of President Obama, and all the lies fling against him and his administration, the right were determined to take back the White House. If a racist and bigoted candidate was to be their means, they didn’t care.

I worked with staunch GOPers who liked Bernie — they wouldn’t have voted for him because of taxes cuts they wanted, and eventually received.

I voted for Bernie in the 2016 California primary, but he had his faults and vulnerabilities. I’m not blind to the reality of partisan politics, and if Republicans saw higher taxes, more regulation with a Bernie presidency, there would have been no attack too low. The image of a socialist picking the pocket of honest [white] workers to give to others [POC] would have made Lee Atwater smile.

Yet she was the most disliked after trump, and he was the most liked bar none. That has an effect on how much the 'mud' did.

Look. In every race Hillary ever ran, she began the race at her top, and only went down the rest of the race in approval. Bernie did the opposite: the more people saw him, the more they liked him.

Since you're posting anecdotes - I heard from a lot of people who 'never vote for Democrats' who said Bernie was their first choice and trump their second. Who would have voted for him. Bernie had two independents support him for every one that supported Hillary - there are more independents than either party, but that didn't win the party primary, quite.

I think you are falling for narrow thinking. As if voters are locked. Changes happen, political revolutions happen, and for a Reagan who can push voters to hate government and taxes, a Bernie can push them to support different policies. There'd have been a lot of GOOD press for him as well as much - and the media blackout. He was the best chance to beat trump.

 

[venice_ca]

@Craig234

I’ll leave you to your sweet dreams of Bernie and what might have been, plus this comment:

Since Trump, the most disliked candidate won, why would Bernie’s likability have mattered at all?

I’m out.

 

[Craig234]

I’ll leave you to your sweet dreams of Bernie and what might have been, plus this comment:

Man, you are more snotty than Hillary is arrogant. Stopped reading. Rude and pointless to interact. As horrified as I am by trump beating Hillary, there is this silver lining about a lot of Hillary supporters who deserve it. Who were some of her worst enemies alienating people from supporting her.

 

[renee]

Yes, her flaws weren't 'lack of experience'. But I've long said I think experience if overrated in a president. Give me a president with no experience and good qualities, and I'll take them hugely over a president with the most experience and a bad agenda. There's massive staff to make up for a lack of experience. Experience can be useful in a president, but it's overrated versus other issues.

What are these “good qualities that are more important than experience?

 

[renee]

Man, you are more snotty than Hillary is arrogant. Stopped reading. Rude and pointless to interact. As horrified as I am by trump beating Hillary, there is this silver lining about a lot of Hillary supporters who deserve it. Who were some of her worst enemies alienating people from supporting her.

Her gender! a woman will win is if she is attractive..
what makes Hillary more arrogant than Bernie people would make fun of her voice, but Bernie has a weird voice.
By the way, the high school I went to graduated, Bernie Sanders, Ruth, Bader, Ginsberg, Carole, King, Chuck, Schumer, Judge, Judy, and me

 

[renee]

The phrase was coined about her by a leading Canadian woman politician. I thought it would get a response and yes, I mean it. I live in a country where women have been making it on their own for decades. We had a woman Prime Minister in 1992. Our federal Cabinet is 50% women...so yes. There have been more than a dozen first ministers at the provincial level and the most recent head of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police is a woman. Our defense minister is woman.

How many women in dick swinger Clinton's cabinet?

So yeah. Compared to other country's she's a coattails housewife.

what has she ever won for herself? What has she ever accomplished beyond getting filthy rich speaking to bankers?

I can put at least 500 women ahead of her who have accomplished more with less.

I guess when you have few women role models you have to accept shoddy as great.

She won senator of ny twice! She was one of the most respected Secretary of State
She was appointed the first female chair of the Legal Services Corporation in 1978 and became the first female partner at Little Rock's Rose Law Firm the following year. The National Law Journal twice listed her as one of the hundred most influential lawyers in America.
I wish I was as “shoddy “as she is
how about giving me all these women who have accomplished more? I don’t know many men who have accomplished as much as she has.
The term Köteles means she did nothing by herself, and it was only because of her husband. She was a dynamite, first lady and all over the world

 

[Craig234]

What are these “good qualities that are more important than experience?

Seriously? Experience can be a NEGATIVE. Some of these good qualities include some good sense, evaluating people, compassion, tolerance, humanitarianism, a sense of justice, even things like some culture (think about what JFK did for culture), honesty, character, a good moral compass, hatred of war, I could go on. Nixon was 'experienced' - enabling him to do more wrong.

 

[renee]

Seriously? Experience can be a NEGATIVE. Some of these good qualities include some good sense, evaluating people, compassion, tolerance, humanitarianism, a sense of justice, even things like some culture (think about what JFK did for culture), honesty, character, a good moral compass, hatred of war, I could go on. Nixon was 'experienced' - enabling him to do more wrong.

Amd you’re saying Hillary had none of those qualities? She did so much for women and children all over the world but all those qualities you described Trump doesn’t have one of them.

 

[Craig234]

Amd you’re saying Hillary had none of those qualities?

It's annoying when you're having a conversation, a person asks a question, you answer, and they pretend they asked a different question. We could debate Hillary's qualities, but that would reward doing that.

 

[Cope]

Hillary was the most qualified person to ever run for the office.

And most unliked ...

That makes her a not good candidate, duh.