Democratic Election 2016 - Hillary Clinton Megathread [OFFICIAL]

[LaserSharkDFB]

There's always the option of "No President", if it gets the majority.

Which would mean the House gets to vote on the President and the Senate votes on the VP. That would be interesting.

(Wonder who came up with that rule, though, and why they hated the Senate so much. Picking the veep is the ultimate participation award.)

[Damajin]

If you didn't have an actual retort you should have saved yourself the time. The regular and moderate media bias towards spectacle and narrative is one thing. Drudge is clearly another.

I had an actual retort, one that is more valid than your 'regular and moderate media bias towards spectacle and narrative' which is fucking hysterical, the assumption that your 'regular and moderate' media is any less biased and particular than Drudge. I get it, Drudge is far more influential than anything else in the media and is considered to be a juggernaut of both the political and news apparatus, but excusing anything that you may favor as more nuanced or free from an overwhelming bias is a joke.

Bias is bias, yours and mine, Drudge and whatever the fuck you read and get your info from. Accepting this and getting over the illusion that there's anything in this day and age as an unbiased source is really the only recourse you have which you should take.

[Daelak]

I had an actual retort, one that is more valid than your 'regular and moderate media bias towards spectacle and narrative' which is fucking hysterical, the assumption that your 'regular and moderate' media is any less biased and particular than Drudge. I get it, Drudge is far more influential than anything else in the media and is considered to be a juggernaut of both the political and news apparatus, but excusing anything that you may favor as more nuanced or free from an overwhelming bias is a joke.

Bias is bias, yours and mine, Drudge and whatever the fuck you read and get your info from. Accepting this and getting over the illusion that there's anything in this day and age as an unbiased source is really the only recourse you have which you should take.

NPR, BBC, REUTERS, NYTIMES, want me to go on?

[LaserSharkDFB]

I had an actual retort, one that is more valid than your 'regular and moderate media bias towards spectacle and narrative' which is fucking hysterical, the assumption that your 'regular and moderate' media is any less biased and particular than Drudge. I get it, Drudge is far more influential than anything else in the media and is considered to be a juggernaut of both the political and news apparatus, but excusing anything that you may favor as more nuanced or free from an overwhelming bias is a joke.

Bias is bias, yours and mine, Drudge and whatever the fuck you read and get your info from. Accepting this and getting over the illusion that there's anything in this day and age as an unbiased source is really the only recourse you have which you should take.

Hahahaha, what?

Consumers of Drudge Report

Just 5% of respondents get news from the Drudge Report in a typical week, and the clear majority of its audience (74%) is right-of-center (by comparison, 26% of all panelists are right-of-center).

[Damajin]

NPR, BBC, REUTERS, NYTIMES, want me to go on?

Sure, go right ahead. All biased, all with their side of the agenda clearly staked out.

[Daelak]

Sure, go right ahead. All biased, all with their side of the agenda clearly staked out.

Show me the bias in this article:

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-w...uspect-in-2014

and this one:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-37417898

and this one:

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-we...-idUSKCN11Q08U

and this one:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/21/us...ald-trump.html

[Damajin]

Hahahaha, what?

You might want to become aware of what the designate influential means. 2 seconds of searching will find you tons of articles denoting just how much of the political/social/intellectual elite especially in Washington soak that website and every link it posts up, and with about a billion page visits a month it has demonstrated time and time again going all the way back to the Monica Lewinski fiasco that it can shape the news narrative, political discourse and direction of things.

An extra 2 seconds will find you tons of articles on Democrat/Left sites complaining about the overwhelming influence of Drudge, so when your own people are bitching and you are the one who isn't aware perhaps the fault lies with you.

Hahahahaha.

[DocSavageFan]

You'll notice that neither of them are claiming 'OMG PARKINSONS'. Hell, Powell just says she's overworked. That's a far cry from what the healthers want to believe.

I never said that. I'm just pointing out that she has been having issues with stairs the past year or two and her health is a legitimate question.

[hrugner]

Do you believe that theory? There are pictures of the rally and in the same comment section the theory is debunked.

It's certainly a fun theory. Probably garbage but still neat. I know why most of the errors happen in the film(bad encoding), but I still don't know why she points and waves at the flag. Is she just being silly?

Actually, with the dog barking and the head jerking thing, maybe she really is just a silly person.

[Shalcker]

Do you believe that theory? There are pictures of the rally and in the same comment section the theory is debunked.

I'm not saying rally didn't happen.

It just looks improbable that people would not actually turn phones to film Hillary coming in. From given angle they should clearly see her.

[Orbitus]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_8AO5MDBEw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtQVIcxq82E
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/09/13...ry-health.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azUpfzDNxpw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-7hjf2zgp2c
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9C12ZvOJNfs

Posting video evidence of her having seizures and being unable to talk during her speeches is, I'm sure, stuff of conspiracy.

Literally anything that isn't reported by mainstream media is claimed conspiracy. Unfortunately it doesn't take much looking into the past to see that American journalism isn't all its cracked up to be.

But I'm sure all these videos only exist because Clinton has been in the public eye for so long. Surely there are videos out there of Trump being carried to his van like a sack of potatoes while having a seizure? Anyone too close to the limelight must have the same defects as Clinton, right? It's not that it's a problem with her, it's a problem with everyone else!

Ignore the evidence and call it conspiracy though, whatever floats your boat.

When your first video says it is "irrefutable proof" that she had a seizure, then yeah, you just posted a fucking conspiracy theory.

[LaserSharkDFB]

I never said that. I'm just pointing out that she has been having issues with stairs the past year or two and her health is a legitimate question.

Well, you did ask if Powell and Whatshisface were also conspiracy theorists, which based on their comments they clearly aren't. So you kind of need to pick a point and stick with it. 'Concerns about her health' =/= 'SHE IS LITERALLY DYING FROM BRAIN SPIDERS', which is what the crazies are trying to say.

[Orbitus]

Do you believe that theory? There are pictures of the rally and in the same comment section the theory is debunked.

He is a Putin loving Trump supporter. Of course he believes it. He believes anything he sees on Russian Television and Infowars.

[Lenonis]

(Wonder who came up with that rule, though, and why they hated the Senate so much. Picking the veep is the ultimate participation award.)

The original set up of the Congress was that the senate was the rich elite and the house was the power of the people so to speak.

I'm guessing the election of president by the house is a nod to the concept that the house is supposed to represent "the people" as well as balance the very large powers the Senate has (mainly confirming nominations and other things that the house has no say on).

I do wonder if the 12th amendment was something that was ever really intended to be used -- it could easily set up a very strange situation, especially given the way the house and senate often are majority party different.

- - - Updated - - -

her health is a legitimate question.

Why? Her doctor said she's fine, especially once she recovers from the pneumonia.

Even if you don't accept that then the question becomes "until when". When is her health concerns no longer a matter? She has three debates coming up not to mention having to go campaign hardcore in battleground states. If she's too frail to be president it seems unlikely she'd have the energy to perform to win the election. Seems like a big old self-correcting issue to me -- if you buy into that there is even an issue.

[DocSavageFan]

Well, you did ask if Powell and Whatshisface were also conspiracy theorists, which based on their comments they clearly aren't. So you kind of need to pick a point and stick with it. 'Concerns about her health' =/= 'SHE IS LITERALLY DYING FROM BRAIN SPIDERS', which is what the crazies are trying to say.

You appear to have a comprehension problem here...I never said that she has a disease nor am I defending those that says she does. But there appears to be a pattern forming here that she has some kind of problem...it could be nothing, or it could also mean that she does indeed have a health issue she hasn't disclosed as well...I don't know what it means at this point...but it's odd.

[Cybran]

Shillery seems to have dementia as well. In her book she says that Kaine is a bad VP choice, but after he steps down as DNC chair to help her rig the primary he becomes the pick.

[LaserSharkDFB]

Shillery seems to have dementia as well. In her book she says that Kaine is a bad VP choice, but after he steps down as DNC chair to help her rig the primary he becomes the pick.

Even assuming the worst of this quote: so what? She isn't allowed to change her mind after eight years? Since the 2008 campaign, Kaine served two years at the DNC chairman and three years as a Senator. Is that not enough additional experience to let her revise her opinion of him?

(Of course, Trump has never horribly criticized people when they opposed him and lavished praise on those same people when they were on his side, noooooo...)

[BrerBear]

Even assuming the worst of this quote: so what? She isn't allowed to change her mind after eight years? Since the 2008 campaign, Kaine served two years at the DNC chairman and three years as a Senator. Is that not enough additional experience to let her revise her opinion of him?

(Of course, Trump has never horribly criticized people when they opposed him and lavished praise on those same people when they were on his side, noooooo...)

Especially since VP picks are often about demographics and balancing, rather than the person. She said they're "terrible choices", not "terrible people".

Another Cybran Fail (ACF).

[Daerio]

Even assuming the worst of this quote: so what? She isn't allowed to change her mind after eight years? Since the 2008 campaign, Kaine served two years at the DNC chairman and three years as a Senator. Is that not enough additional experience to let her revise her opinion of him?

Anyone without a serious learning disorder should be able to recognize the VP pick was paid his due after rigging the democratic primary. What's wrong with that? Well, everything basically, but I don't personally have the time or inclination to explain why to the mentally challenged.

Suffice to say, she made her VP pick to beat Sanders in the primary rather than to beat whoever the Republicans put up, even after publicly calling him a bad VP pick.

The Hillbots won't care as usual, though. And they'll never be able to understand why she lost. It must be all those racist conspiracist crazies that hate women.

[LaserSharkDFB]

Anyone without a serious learning disorder should be able to recognize the VP pick was paid his due after rigging the democratic primary. What's wrong with that? Well, everything basically, but I don't personally have the time or inclination to explain why to the mentally challenged.

Suffice to say, she made her VP pick to beat Sanders in the primary rather than to beat whoever the Republicans put up, even after publicly calling him a bad VP pick.

The Hillbots won't care as usual, though. And they'll never be able to understand why she lost. It must be all those racist conspiracist crazies.

Tinfoil hat is too tight again, I see. Makes you cranky. You need a nap and maybe a bottle of apple juice.

So... let me see if I can untangle your line of reasoning. Not the 'rigging the primary' bit, as I'm not sure how that relates to Kaine but I'm sure it makes perfect sense to you. In 2008 she thought he was a terrible VP pick against McCain (or her? Not sure), and in 2016 she thought he was a good pick against Sanders. And... this is a bad thing... how? Two completely different situations, two different choices. Again, so what?

If she said 'this man is completely incapable to hold the office of VP' you may have had a point. Given that this is a largely strategic move, your nonsensical ravings are more nonsensical than ususal.