|
Joementum posted:Obviously nothing's even close to over yet, but don't mistake him for an unserious candidate. Except Walker didn't win Wisconsin, the Koch brothers did through massive spending on propaganda and astroturfing, and rich as they are they aren't going to pull that poo poo off against the GOP machine on a federal level. Unless some fresh-faced Republican Obama comes out of loving nowhere I'm half expecting Romney to step in and take the reins from a floundering Jeb and lead us on all another magical journey. What happens if for some reason Hillary doesn't actually run?
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 03:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 18:12 |
|
|
Wheeee posted:What happens if for some reason Hillary doesn't actually run? A Republican will be sworn in on January 20, 2017.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 03:45
|
|
|
President Klobuchar.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 03:47
|
|
|
Joementum posted:A Republican will be sworn in on January 20, 2017. lmao
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 03:49
|
|
|
Joementum posted:A Republican will be sworn in on January 20, 2017. If Hillary decided not to run Joe Biden would win the nomination and defeat the Republican nominee in every national debate by making loud car revving sounds into the microphone. When he is sworn in he wears aviators and the first words of his inaugural address are "American, it's time to go fast".
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 03:53
|
|
|
Joementum posted:A Republican will be sworn in on January 20, 2017. Well if (When) Harper wins again this year in Canada I hope a Republican is sworn in so this sin-cursed world can perish in flames as it deserves.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 03:53
|
|
|
I would vote for any Canadian running for president Mookface for president
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 03:55
|
|
|
Joementum posted:A Republican will be sworn in on January 20, 2017. You're too pessimistic. Joe Biden will be sworn in on January 20, 2017. gnarlyhotep posted:I would vote for any Canadian running for president Ah, the elusive Cruz supporter.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 03:55
|
|
|
gnarlyhotep posted:I would vote for any Canadian running for president Ted Cruz is Canadian.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 03:55
|
|
|
gnarlyhotep posted:I would vote for any Canadian running for president The only Canadian running for president in 2016 is Ted Cruz.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 03:55
|
|
|
he doesn't seem very Canadian
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 03:56
|
|
|
gnarlyhotep posted:I would vote for any Canadian running for president 
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 03:57
|
|
|
It is sort of funny that there have already been two opposite email scandals: Hillary using gmail so that nobody could see her correspondence and Jeb releasing all of his, doxxing a bunch of his constituents in the process.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 04:09
|
|
|
hay cutie 
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 04:10
|
|
|
A lot of the people I worked with four years ago used gmail exclusively, despite it being pretty explicit policy to use their EDU address, because Google docs used to be a pain in the rear end when you tried to use a non-gmail account. I am sure that is not the reason Clinton did it, but the use of pretty necessary business technology never does seem to keep pace with approved software in office policies, which does affect government operations.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 04:16
|
|
|
Hm, I wonder if it'll go anywhere. I would expect something like this to be a non-starter, but there are a lot of people that would do anything to keep Hilary from getting the nomination, and they're in congress.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 04:18
|
|
|
I think it's a non-starter that will make them look petty in the long run.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 04:20
|
|
|
Bicyclops posted:I think it's a non-starter that will make them look petty in the long run. Someone's forgotten Vince Foster. Hillary will be hounded on her emails for life.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 04:23
|
|
|
Full Battle Rattle posted:Hm, I wonder if it'll go anywhere. I would expect something like this to be a non-starter, but there are a lot of people that would do anything to keep Hilary from getting the nomination, and they're in congress. Unless they can produce some scandal that the e-mail was being used to cover up, I don't see how it's not a non-starter.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 04:25
|
|
|
Karnegal posted:Unless they can produce some scandal that the e-mail was being used to cover up, I don't see how it's not a non-starter. It's another nail in the "the Clintons think the rules don't apply to them" narrative.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 04:26
|
|
|
Karnegal posted:Unless they can produce some scandal that the e-mail was being used to cover up, I don't see how it's not a non-starter. Did Hillary use her private email to hide what she knew about Benghazi?
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 04:27
|
|
|
Ya'll forgettin' the really obvious angle on this. She did it so she could hide her Benghazi lies. EDIT ugh, beaten
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 04:27
|
|
|
She could Old Person it up like Jebush and release everything in her inbox, unredacted.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 04:31
|
|
|
FilthyImp posted:She could Old Person it up like Jebush and release everything in her inbox, unredacted. That's what she has to do, if she has nothing to hide. What's she hiding? Did she order the marines to turn back from the Benghazi rescue?
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 04:34
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:It's another nail in the "the Clintons think the rules don't apply to them" narrative. Yeah, but that's just a circle jerk among the base. Those were never going to be her votes anyway. I mean they need something substantive if they want to get regular voters. And if she ends up running against Bush^3, then undecided people will probably consider their tech gaffs a wash.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 04:38
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Someone's forgotten Vince Foster. It can only go so far, because everyone in Washington uses personal email for exactly this reason, so they only make themselves vulnerable if they push it too much. It'll get some mention in the permanent committee on BENGHAZI and then blow over.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 04:39
|
|
|
She should be required to release her long form emails. Seriously, this is not going anywhere and nobody is going to give a poo poo who wasn't already voting against her anyway.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 04:43
|
|
|
She probably broke the Federal Records Act and violated political norms, but this is a non-starter.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 04:57
|
|
|
I'm certain it's being added to chain emails and lunatic fringe sites as we speak.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 04:59
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:It's another nail in the "the Clintons think the rules don't apply to them" narrative. Is there a rule against using private email?
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 05:00
|
|
|
Misandrist Duck posted:She probably broke the Federal Records Act and violated political norms, but this is a non-starter. Watch a Clinton unfairly escape prosecution in accord with both the letter and spirit of law.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 05:04
|
|
|
DynamicSloth posted:Is there a rule against using private email? If nothing classified gets sent to it and you follow the records act it's probably not a big deal.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 05:06
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:If nothing classified gets sent to it and you follow the records act it's probably not a big deal. Considering she only used a personal email, classified information and non-compliance with the records act is all but assured.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 05:11
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Considering she only used a personal email, classified information and non-compliance with the records act is all but assured. You've never worked around executive old people. They don't work out of email. They get other people to do that for them. There's still a decent chance of a violation but it's certainly not "all but assured."
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 05:16
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Considering she only used a personal email, classified information and non-compliance with the records act is all but assured. And proven how? A Darrel Issa led investigation into Hillary's evil Benghazi emails will only help Hillary's numbers.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 05:49
|
|
|
Vienna Circlejerk posted:You've never worked around executive old people. They don't work out of email. They get other people to do that for them. There's still a decent chance of a violation but it's certainly not "all but assured." Pretty much this. Politicians still operate on "my aide will print it out and hand it to me."
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 05:52
|
|
|
Vienna Circlejerk posted:Seriously, this is not going anywhere and nobody is going to give a poo poo who wasn't already voting against her anyway. The only way this gets legs is if it leads to a horrible, proven, easily identifiable and understandable security breach with concrete consequences. We will know if this is the case because it will be trumpeted across all major media 24/7—not the email account info itself, but the actual information contained in said breach. If this happens, it will be a big deal and all but sink Clinton's campaign. But it won't be, because something that big would've been seen already. Which means this is a big fat load of nothing that will fall right into the BENGHAZI!!! background noise and have absolutely zero traction with anyone not looking for an excuse to scream and stamp their feet. In summary, Vienna Circlejerk posted:Seriously, this is not going anywhere and nobody is going to give a poo poo who wasn't already voting against her anyway.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 06:51
|
|
|
Chokes McGee posted:The only way this gets legs is if it leads to a horrible, proven, easily identifiable and understandable security breach with concrete consequences. We will know if this is the case because it will be trumpeted across all major media 24/7—not the email account info itself, but the actual information contained in said breach. If this happens, it will be a big deal and all but sink Clinton's campaign. Fox News is saving it for October, 2016. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 06:56
|
|
|
I'm voting for Chokes McGee in 2016.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 07:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 18:12 |
|
|
Hillary is going to win by like 10 points and I don't see how an Obama scandal would affect too much. Consider: 1) Republicans have leaned on that poo poo so much nobody even knows what a scandal is anymore 2) Hillary has plenty of experience attacking Obama, and will do so if it's to her benefit 3) It's Hillary
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 07:47
|
|