Democratic Election 2016 - Hillary Clinton Megathread [OFFICIAL]

[May90]

Yeah? Do you think yourself pithy or clever here?

Not sure where this question came from, but no, I'm just a guy with an opinion.

[Lenonis]

Hillary bots will still defender her "nuh uh it's not true!" I can't wait till this election is fucking over. Then we all can point and laugh at the joke we're left with regardless who wins.

Sure, the extreme part will, just like the extreme Trump supporters won't acknowledge his flaws.

But most people actually admit that Hillary is a flawed candidate and many would prefer a different one, but when you get attacks like "She's a criminal" and "She's killed over 60 people!" or whatever nonsense you end up tending to reflexively dismiss it.

I've said it before -- the GOP is ruining their campaign by being hyper rabid on issues like Benghazi which makes people tune them out when it comes to Hillary. In their overeagerness to tear her down they really screwed up their ability to get any message out that people other than their base will listen to.

- - - Updated - - -

nice question dodging though , for 3 posts now. you must be Bill.

You don't honestly expect me to take you seriously do you?

[Orbitus]

Even if the premise "Hillary is a criminal" is true -- there is still this thing called a trial and such so to declare that she'll be in prison in a matter of months is false given that charges haven't even been filed yet.

Making up your own facts must be fun eh?

As has been stated before it's so strange people point to things that are fiction rather than attacking Hillary for the numerous areas she's legitimately weak.

You can't reason with people that listen to Alex Jones and fake doctors on Fox News.

[zenkai]

Sure, the extreme part will, just like the extreme Trump supporters won't acknowledge his flaws.

But most people actually admit that Hillary is a flawed candidate and many would prefer a different one, but when you get attacks like "She's a criminal" and "She's killed over 60 people!" or whatever nonsense you end up tending to reflexively dismiss it.

I've said it before -- the GOP is ruining their campaign by being hyper rabid on issues like Benghazi which makes people tune them out when it comes to Hillary. In their overeagerness to tear her down they really screwed up their ability to get any message out that people other than their base will listen to.

- - - Updated - - -


You don't honestly expect me to take you seriously do you?

That's because GOP has no message, it's ran by clowns, not that Democrats are any better but the media don't focus on their flaws as much, they're already ignoring the email scandal.

[Merkava]

Here we go again with the semantics.

If you deeply care about what the GOP platform explicitly states, then yes, you are correct.

However if we want to talk about what the GOP platform means, or what the goals of the GOP are in this area, then it takes a spectacular amount of ignorance to not realize that this is a platform that is very specifically targets to reducing LGBT rights, including conversion therapy.

It's not semantics, it's you guys wanting to read into something that isn't there. If we're talking about goals of the GOP, then it's on you to show that one of their "goals" is conversion therapy. You simply can't make the case that it has anything to do with conversion therapy. That's why Snopes even said it was unproven.

You wanna sit back and say, "we can't prove it, but we all know what they meant, wink wink." Well it doesn't work like that.

[I Push Buttons]

It's not semantics, it's you guys wanting to read into something that isn't there. If we're talking about goals of the GOP, then it's on you to show that one of their "goals" is conversion therapy. You simply can't make the case that it has anything to do with conversion therapy. That's why Snopes even said it was unproven.

You wanna sit back and say, "we can't prove it, but we all know what they meant, wink wink." Well it doesn't work like that.

So if an evangelical Christian decides to force their underage gay child to go through gay conversion therapy, the GOP platform doesn't allow that?

[zEmini]

CNN on facebook is ran by the Hilary campaign. There has been ZERO critical postings about her for the last several months. Reading the comments has been a great pop corn moment. Looks like CNN is taking on the "Fair and Balanced" approach. Fox news should sue them!

[Merkava]

So if an evangelical Christian decides to force their underage gay child to go through gay conversion therapy, the GOP platform doesn't allow that?

I don't know. The reason I don't know is because the GOP platform doesn't say anything about gay conversion therapy. It's neither expressly permitted not denied. For the record, I don't believe the Democratic Platform addresses it either. You could make the case that when they say "medical treatment and therapy for their minor children", they could be talking about treatment for depression, cerebral palsy, or even transgender therapy.

For the record, I'm probably one of the most anti gay conversion therapy people on here. I have the posts to back that up, for whatever that's worth. I'm not coming at this from an ideological perspective, I'm just asking that people prove what they say. That's all. Someone on here, Vanyali, I think, said that the GOP Platform included support for forced conversion therapy. That's simply not proven.

[Dug]

CNN on facebook is ran by the Hilary campaign. There has been ZERO critical postings about her for the last several months. Reading the comments has been a great pop corn moment. Looks like CNN is taking on the "Fair and Balanced" approach. Fox news should sue them!

Well can you blame them when Trump won't shut his pie hole for a single day? He would be doing so much better if he had just stayed low after the conventions and let the email scandal pick up traction. But nah, he wanted to stay in the spot light and keep stoking the fires. Trump stuff gets far more views/clicks and that's all CNN gives a shit about.

[TZucchini]

It's not semantics, it's you guys wanting to read into something that isn't there.

I'd say the platform of the GOP allows gay-conversion therapy to not only exist, but encourages its use.

I mean, the language "We support the right of parents to determine the proper treatment or therapy, for their minor children" was crafted by Tony Perkins. A known advocate of gay-conversion therapy.

It's fairly obvious what the RNC is saying, without actually saying it.

[Lenonis]

It's not semantics, it's you guys wanting to read into something that isn't there.

Uh...the GOP has been very open about their support of conversion therapy, not to mention being very transparent about their anti-LGBT agenda.

I didn't even know it was something that people still questioned.

Not sure why you are doing this hand waving about the GOP when it comes to the gays. It's not really a question is it?

- - - Updated - - -

Someone on here, Vanyali, I think, said that the GOP Platform included support for forced conversion therapy. That's simply not proven.

This is what I meant about semantics. Sure the GOP platform didn't explicitly address conversion therapy...and frankly I'm not sure why the word "mandatory" was used as I doubt a vast majority of conservates would support mandatory conversion therapy. But that being said it is very clear and has been expressed by various conservative voices that conversion therapy should be allowed and supported, if not promoted. (Just not mandated -- I haven't heard that)

[BrerBear]

CNN on facebook is ran by the Hilary campaign. There has been ZERO critical postings about her for the last several months. Reading the comments has been a great pop corn moment. Looks like CNN is taking on the "Fair and Balanced" approach. Fox news should sue them!

Literally the top post on CNN's Facebook page right now is another tired retread of the Clinton emails.

[Adam Jensen]

Very hard to argue with people that suport scum

Gonna laugh hard when she looses to trump and the fuckin denial that you and others like you gonna go.

Hate trump but going to be fun seeing the massive crying

Yeah, that's why 538 has Trump behind Hillary by large margins.

[zenkai]

All the Clinton scandals are complicated, and have some shadow of "doubt" built into them. With Trump, and the GOP, they make everything crystal clear, Trump even repeats it three or four times, for good measure... even when given a life line to not say the dumb stuff he just said three times.

The GOP putting in Anti-Gay rhetoric into the platform is not complicated, you just have to read it, and listen to their politicians supporting the Family Research Council, that supports Conversion Therapy, etc...

It's very easy for the media, and non-political wonks, to monetize/get the GOP scandals.

Republican platform should support Gay, not only because it's the right thing to do but also because anti gay people won't vote Democrat anyway.

[Kyriani]

It's not semantics, it's you guys wanting to read into something that isn't there. If we're talking about goals of the GOP, then it's on you to show that one of their "goals" is conversion therapy. You simply can't make the case that it has anything to do with conversion therapy. That's why Snopes even said it was unproven.

You wanna sit back and say, "we can't prove it, but we all know what they meant, wink wink." Well it doesn't work like that.

NO.

The amendment to the GOP platform that spawned that language originated from the Family Research Council in an effort to combat the illegalization of conversion therapy. That amendment was explicitly intended to plant the seed in the GOP platform for them to fight against "big government" dictating whether or not conservatives can force their kids into conversion therapy if they happen to be gay.

But the GOP, not being entirely stupid, realized that the amendment as put forward by the Family Research Council just wouldn't "sell" well outside of their base. So they removed the specific mention of conversion therapy and focused solely on "the right of parents to determine the proper treatment or therapy, for their minor children". I want to make sure you understand how that language originated in the platform. You don't get to hand wave it away just because the explicit mention of conversion therapy was edited out but the intent still plainly there.

"Perkins originally drafted a more explicit embrace of the practice, but amended the text after consultations with top RNC officials."

Again, you don't get to hand wave that away. The language originally was most explicit about conversion therapy but they rightly realized it would do more harm then good. Watering it down got it into the platform in such an ambiguous form precisely so those like you can pull that kind of BS argument.

I've seen what conversion "therapy" can do to people first hand. It's horrific and should be condemned at any and every opportunity.

[Lenonis]

The GOP putting in Anti-Gay rhetoric into the platform is not complicated, you just have to read it, and listen to their politicians supporting the Family Research Council, that supports Conversion Therapy, etc...

The GOP stating that marriage should be between 1 man and 1 women is anti-gay. The statements in there about reversing the SCOTUS decisions on DOMA and gay marriage is anti-gay. And the talk about religious freedom is mostly anti-gay.

The problem is the GOP is just smart enough to phrase it in a way where they don't talk about LGBT folks directly...thus giving their more misguided followers to say "nuh uh, there is nothing about gay people in here!"

When anything, frankly, with half a brain cell knows what the goal is.

[hrugner]

I'd say the platform of the GOP allows gay-conversion therapy to not only exist, but encourages its use.

I mean, the language "We support the right of parents to determine the proper treatment or therapy, for their minor children" was crafted by Tony Perkins. A known advocate of gay-conversion therapy.

It's fairly obvious what the RNC is saying, without actually saying it.

Are they also encouraging transgender therapy, homeopathy and underage therapeutic marijuana use then?

[zEmini]

Literally the top post on CNN's Facebook page right now is another tired retread of the Clinton emails.

First one I have seen in months. They must be reading MMO Champ.

[Deleted]

Can I be Bill Clinton too?

No, but you can be my Monica Lewinsky.

[Edge-]

First one I have seen in months. They must be reading MMO Champ.

Honestly, if Hillary related articles drove as much traffic and as many clicks/eyeballs as Trump ones did, you bet your ass there would be more articles about her.

But between people being exhausted after a Republican witch hunt that's gone on for years and Trump being a never ending stream of fantastic gaffes and ludicrous comments, why waste their time covering minor controversies related to her? They can drive far more traffic across all channels by continuing to cover Trump.

All Trump has to do is shut the fuck up and stick to Republican talking points and all of a sudden media will have to find other stories to cover, including Hillary. This isn't new, people have been saying this for months now, but Trump refuses to shut the fuck up so media continue to focus on him. They're a business, after all, and will cover what helps them generate the most revenue.

No, but you can be my Monica Lewinsky.

Awww, my second choice was Socks. I can live with Monica though, she was my third choice.