|
BiohazrD posted:You realize that she was also other things besides the wife of a president right? Like I think she had some kind of government job between 2000 and now. 8 years as a senator and 4 as sec of state are nothing all that special as far as presidential candidates go. Her time in the white house is a crucial part of the experience claim that suddenly becomes irrelevant when the nature of that white house administration is questioned.
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 15:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 19:31 |
|
|
Doctor Butts posted:I guess the deal with people who hate Hillary is that they are idiots. Obama for the last 8 years: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KHJbSvidohg
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 15:32
|
|
|
I hate Hillary because I have to hear the word wonk constantly from newspapers, tv, and other talking point echo machines. It's an annoying inside-the-Beltway shibboleth and the amount that it suddenly starts turning up from sources that would normally never use it is a constant reminder of the extent that the media takes direction directly from campaign PR people and does it so lazily that they just parrot the exact wording. Paul Ryan deserves a shallow grave for the same reason
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 15:39
|
|
|
Nevvy Z posted:I'm not clear on how sanctions carried out by multiple states beginning in 1990 are the sole fault of the man who became president in 1992. because they stayed in force for the entirity of bill clinton's presidency and he could have stopped them if he wanted. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RM0uvgHKZe8 and let's not pretend, the multiple states were following the USA's lead.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 15:43
|
|
|
canepazzo posted:Shouldn't surprise anyone but: Cross-posting from USPOL
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 15:50
|
|
|
SickZip posted:8 years as a senator and 4 as sec of state are nothing all that special as far as presidential candidates go. uhhh what the gently caress has gone wrong with your brain
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 16:06
|
|
|
"12 years of national level political experience are nothing, it's the time she spent as the wife of a president that matters" - definitely not at all misogynistic no sir
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 16:08
|
|
|
I can't wait until Hillary's term is over, and the choice is between an even more neocon democratic candidate than her, and a literal nazi
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 16:16
|
|
|
CAPT. Rainbowbeard posted:You're assuming that if I'm not in lockstep with you, I hate Hillary Clinton. This is not a good train of thought. I thought Trump was the fascist. Then stop acting like it? I'm trying to get to the bottom of whether you have any reason for your hatred of Hillary Clinton besides "she beat the candidate I liked, fair and square", and you're not helping very much with your silly denials! Ze Pollack posted:there were those couple of people who said "oh come on it's not like we hosed up Libya THAT much," putting themselves in the ignominious position of setting up a Stalinist to dunk on them. Libya was pretty hosed even before we got involved, and was basically the least bad of our foreign interventions. A much better target for bitching would be Syria, where we went ahead and decided that since we didn't like either side, we wouldn't let either of them win, and then stood around looking shocked when the civil war got worse and worse. Of course, if we hadn't intervened in either conflict, progressives would be complaining about the US implicitly supporting dictators and failing to do anything about the slaughters in the Middle East (just like they complain about the fact that the US didn't intervene in the Egyptian coup and now happily stands by while Sisi merrily butchers and oppresses Islamists).
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 16:22
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Then stop acting like it? I'm trying to get to the bottom of whether you have any reason for your hatred of Hillary Clinton besides "she beat the candidate I liked, fair and square", and you're not helping very much with your silly denials! Fairness implies impartiality, which the DNC and superdelegates have flat out admitted they weren't. You ascribe hatred where there is none, and frankly I don't think you care to stop. I'm sorry I'm not the caricature you're painting me out to be. This isn't going to work, try a new plan of attacking people who aren't in lockstep with you. Bob le Moche posted:I can't wait until Hillary's term is over, and the choice is between an even more neocon democratic candidate than her, and a literal nazi No, that's not the trend you see, because CAPT. Rainbowbeard fucked around with this message at 16:28 on Oct 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 16:23
|
|
|
Bob le Moche posted:I can't wait until Hillary's term is over, and the choice is between an even more neocon democratic candidate than her, and a literal nazi good thing we can elect the fascist now and save time, then
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 16:33
|
|
|
Parts of this thread come across as "AmeriKKKa" presented by South Park. America is a "Two Party" system in the surface, both the Democratic Party and the Republican Party are made up of coalitions, they're just not really identified as such. And I like how "Neocon" is thrown around so much that the definiton now is "Person is a politician that I don't like" Polygynous posted:good thing we can elect the fascist now and save time, then But the Republicans in congress will totally stop him, honest! It's not like the supposedly more rational ones aren't terrified of being primaried by the frothing base or anything.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 16:35
|
|
|
As an actual leftist I am getting really tired of being proven right by history all the time about all my pessimistic predictions and being dismissed by liberals every step of the way, so smug in their own ignorance. They just keep doing the same mistakes over and over again and never learning from them. Denial is a powerful thing. Looking forward to seeing how the liberals in this thread find a way to contort reason to argue that the wars that Hillary will be starting are just and necessary.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 16:44
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Libya was pretty hosed even before we got involved, and was basically the least bad of our foreign interventions. A much better target for bitching would be Syria, where we went ahead and decided that since we didn't like either side, we wouldn't let either of them win, and then stood around looking shocked when the civil war got worse and worse. Of course, if we hadn't intervened in either conflict, progressives would be complaining about the US implicitly supporting dictators and failing to do anything about the slaughters in the Middle East (just like they complain about the fact that the US didn't intervene in the Egyptian coup and now happily stands by while Sisi merrily butchers and oppresses Islamists). Libya was the least bad of your foreign interventions. Ooookay. If that is your benchmark for success then loving hell.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 16:51
|
|
|
What's your opinion about the intervention in Darfur?
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 16:54
|
|
|
Bob le Moche posted:As an actual leftist I am getting really tired of being proven right by history all the time about all my pessimistic predictions and being dismissed by liberals every step of the way, so smug in their own ignorance. They just keep doing the same mistakes over and over again and never learning from them. Denial is a powerful thing. so even if you're right lol what's the solution short of funding a kickstarter to bring over a tankie to tell black people about Hillary's "sudden pandering to black issues"?
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 16:57
|
|
|
CAPT. Rainbowbeard posted:Fairness implies impartiality, which the DNC and superdelegates have flat out admitted they weren't. People have tried to explain that Hillary won the primary by millions of votes. Showing preference to a candidate is not the same as voter suppression or rigging the system - rigging implies changing votes, which there has been zero evidence of. You're bitching about ~superdelegates~ despite the fact that Hillary would have clinched the nomination without them. Superdelegates generally go toward the will of the voters. In 2008, superdelegates heavily favored Clinton but switched towards Obama when they saw that he was preferred by the voters and switched to him. Superdelegates exist in the off chance that the party ends up picking someone unelectable - like if John Edwards was close to getting the nom, then his love child story would have sunk the party. Hell, I'm sure the Republican party would love superdelegates right now since it would have prevented a Trump presidency. The fact that you keep bringing up DNC rigging and superdelegates as reasons you won't vote for Hillary (which are two things she doesn't have control over!) despite them being complete red herrings shows that there's probably just some other reason why you can't bring yourself to vote for her.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 16:58
|
|
|
CAPT. Rainbowbeard posted:Fairness implies impartiality, which the DNC and superdelegates have flat out admitted they weren't. The DNC was not responsible for the stomping that Bernie received throughout the South which is where much of his weakness lied.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 16:59
|
|
|
Taerkar posted:What's your opinion about the intervention in Darfur? a genuine multi-country UN peacekeeping force with boots on the ground to stop a genuine ongoing poo poo show, yeah a good thing that was probably not expansive enough. contrast that with bombing the gently caress out of a country and massively destabilising it. one of the problem with unilateral intervention and repeatedly destroying countries is the fact that it hampers genuine UN co-operation when needed.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 17:02
|
|
|
blackguy32 posted:The DNC was not responsible for the stomping that Bernie received throughout the South which is where much of his weakness lied. oh right, all the racist whites and low-information voters
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 17:05
|
|
|
JFairfax posted:Libya was the least bad of your foreign interventions. As opposed to our stunning successes in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, and more? Our tacit support for the Turkish and Egyptian coups? Our rampant bombing in places like Yemen and Pakistan? boner confessor posted:oh right, all the racist whites and low-information voters Don't forget the minorities, there's lots of those in the South and Bernie did a pretty bad job with them. I guess that might mess up the "only bad people voted for the candidate I don't like" narrative you were clearly going for, though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 17:23
|
|
|
i shoulda have used my sarcasm voice, darn it
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 17:25
|
|
|
Some people have funny definitions for words. Like, for instance, "fair." She or her campaign (and by extension, she) colluded with the media, the DNC and the superdelegates in such a way that her nomination was a foregone conclusion despite the massive grassroots attention given to Bernie. They barely stopped him, and shot themselves in the foot to boot. I'll let go of the election fraud when it's no longer an issue. It's weird how the problems with voting never happened to Clinton supporters, isn't it? Awfully convenient. No need to look into it, either, because... reasons? She sort of kind of adopted his platform in an attempt to win back the people who didn't care for her. I wasn't joking about voting for whoever will promise me Universal Health Care. If I don't vote for someone, that doesn't mean I hate them or that I think they won't be an okay president. It means I am using my vote for its intended purpose, to vote for the candidate that best supports my values, to try to shift the political conversation back to where I feel it should be. If everyone did that, the political situation would be quite different. I live in Illinois, there's little chance of Mrs. Clinton not winning here. Also, I basically agree with everything that Bob le Moche is saying. It physically pains some of you to realize that I don't hate her but still won't vote for her, I guess.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 17:25
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:i shoulda have used my sarcasm voice, darn it In this thread, yes  quote:She or her campaign (and by extension, she) colluded with the media, the DNC and the superdelegates in such a way that her nomination was a foregone conclusion despite the massive grassroots attention given to Bernie. They barely stopped him, and shot themselves in the foot to boot. Citation Needed
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 17:26
|
|
|
CAPT. Rainbowbeard posted:She or her campaign (and by extension, she) colluded with the media, the DNC and the superdelegates in such a way that her nomination was a foregone conclusion despite the massive grassroots attention given to Bernie. They barely stopped him, and shot themselves in the foot to boot. no she/they didn't. bernie lost by millions of votes because he has no support outside of white college political newbies and internet shutins desperate for anime to become real CAPT. Rainbowbeard posted:I'll let go of the election fraud when it's no longer an issue. It's weird how the problems with voting never happened to Clinton supporters, isn't it? Awfully convenient. No need to look into it, either, because... reasons? no you wont, you are a conspiracy theorist
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 17:27
|
|
|
CAPT. Rainbowbeard posted:She or her campaign (and by extension, she) colluded with the media, the DNC and the superdelegates in such a way that her nomination was a foregone conclusion despite the massive grassroots attention given to Bernie. They barely stopped him, and shot themselves in the foot to boot. Provide your evidence. And no, RT.com is not a valid source.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 17:27
|
|
|
CAPT. Rainbowbeard posted:She sort of kind of adopted his platform in an attempt to win back the people who didn't care for her. I wasn't joking about voting for whoever will promise me Universal Health Care. Then you're not going to be voting for a long loving time in this country. Hillary wants to add the public option to Obamacare, which is a great first step towards that goal, but the idea that we could elect a President who could give us actual functioning UHC within 8 years is laughable.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 17:30
|
|
|
CAPT. Rainbowbeard posted:Some people have funny definitions for words. Like, for instance, "fair." You don't have to vote for her. But oh boy, something you should realize is that a grassroots campaign can only get you so far. What Bernie needed were seasoned organizers, and he didn't have that.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 17:32
|
|
|
"why would i vote for the candidate who pushed for UHC twenty years ago, got shot down, and is trying to incrementally work in UHC through the existing system? i demand empty promises and high minded, pointless rhetoric leading towards nothing because i am a politically sophisticated voter!"
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 17:33
|
|
|
Sanders was handled with kid's gloves in the primary, especially considering that he's not a Dem.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 17:47
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:oh right, all the racist whites and low-information voters would you say, perhaps, that minorities just didn't know what was best for themselves?
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 17:49
|
|
|
Motto posted:Sanders was handled with kid's gloves in the primary, especially considering that he's not a Dem. Sure he is. He's way more of a dem than Lieberman, and that guy got picked for VP
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 17:51
|
|
|
Lyesh posted:Sure he is. He's way more of a dem than Lieberman, and that guy got picked for VP he wasn't a registered member of the democratic party until just before he started his bid. despite the fact that he caucased with the dems and voted with them pretty much all of the time when you purposely reject membership in a group to make a point and then try to join the group and say the group represents you when it's in your advantage to do so, some members of the group might resent you for it! for shocking reasons this basic example of human social dynamics tends to baffle bernouts
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 17:55
|
|
|
I'd rather not vote at all so I can feel smug as the guy that literally said he'd use nukes becomes our president. Feeling smug about my victory against this dastardly process as bombs surround myself and dear loved ones is all I require. Also I never participate or vote in local elections. That's important but I won't mention it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 17:59
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:he wasn't a registered member of the democratic party until just before he started his bid. despite the fact that he caucased with the dems and voted with them pretty much all of the time Sure, but we're supposed to be above that kind of thing. That's the entire argument for trying to get ~bernouts~ to vote for Clinton in the general. I have a number of strong disagreements with Clinton's policies. DLC-style triangulation is a terrible idea that has lost the party a lot of support and is part of the reason that this is a close election. Foreign policy that is more hawkish than Obama's is also pretty bad. I'm still likely to vote for her just because Trump is actually worse, and she's an excellent bureaucrat who will do well with most of the low-level grunt work of the executive. Keeping competent people running stuff like FEMA is important. SCOTUS nominees are important. But goddamn.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 18:03
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:he wasn't a registered member of the democratic party until just before he started his bid. despite the fact that he caucased with the dems and voted with them pretty much all of the time I have a feeling any real threat to Hillary would have gotten the same treatment, registered Democrat or not.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 18:05
|
|
|
Lyesh posted:Sure, but we're supposed to be above that kind of thing. That's the entire argument for trying to get ~bernouts~ to vote for Clinton in the general. i dunno if anyone's above "sending snippy emails about how someone doesn't like the other candidate" but the problem is that this will get spun into concrete evidence of vote fixing by conspiracy theorists who have a hard time accepting reality, and there's really nothing you can do about those people people will find a reason to explain or rationalize why their feelings are actually a logical truth. the DNC fixed the election for clinton, and bush brought down the towers. fifteen years later people are still 9/11 truthers, because they have to find reasons for their beliefs to be true. these people are better off ignored woke wedding drone posted:I have a feeling any real threat to Hillary would have gotten the same treatment, registered Democrat or not. there was no 'treatment' though is my point. people point at internal DNC emails talking about how dumb sanders is as proof of election rigging. yeah no, sanders irl is dumb
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 18:07
|
|
|
woke wedding drone posted:I have a feeling any real threat to Hillary would have gotten the same treatment, registered Democrat or not. Very true. Hillary is pretty good at this political thing hence why Republicans have been gunning for her for twenty years now.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 18:08
|
|
|
Lyesh posted:I have a number of strong disagreements with Clinton's policies. DLC-style triangulation is a terrible idea that has lost the party a lot of support and is part of the reason that this is a close election. Triangulation hasn't been a thing since the Clinton administration and this isn't a close election, at all. It's like people don't even live in the same country or something.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 18:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 19:31 |
|
|
CAPT. Rainbowbeard posted:She sort of kind of adopted his platform in an attempt to win back the people who didn't care for her. I wasn't joking about voting for whoever will promise me Universal Health Care. And I wasn't joking when I said this means you're promising your vote to a good liar, because no one who promises UHC in the next eight years is telling the truth. Hillary Clinton knows that better than anyone.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 18:10
|
|