Democratic Election 2016 - Hillary Clinton Megathread [OFFICIAL]

[Elegiac]

It's amazing how this bothers you but none of the shit Hillary does, doesn't bother you. You guys have some fucked up morals

Largely because 'the shit Hillary does is' a) less bad, b) grossly overstated by public perception, and c) par for the course in the current system.

A political insider is a known and predictable factor, a populist demagogue and corrupt businessman is not.

[mvaliz]

He clearly stated that if a paper gets something factual wrong, that they should print a retraction to correct the error. Dear god the humanity.

Both you and i know Dump's ego... You damn well know it's to stop ANYBODY from criticizing him, factual or not.

[zenkai]

Largely because 'the shit Hillary does is' a) less bad, b) grossly overstated by public perception, and c) par for the course in the current system.

A political insider is a known and predictable factor, a populist demagogue and corrupt businessman is not.

Trump says stupid shit

Hillary breaks laws

[Elegiac]

Trump says stupid shit

Hillary breaks laws

At least Hillary has never said something seditious on national television.

That aside, it's a bit rich to assume Trump has never broken any laws.

[zenkai]

At least Hillary has never said something seditious on national television.

That aside, it's a bit rich to assume Trump has never broken any laws.

She's said and done plenty but no one on the left cares, just like the right ignores Trumps shit.

- - - Updated - - -

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016...an-debate.html

As Donald Trump and the father of a fallen Muslim U.S. soldier continued trading barbs on Monday morning, Hillary Clinton’s spat with the mom of an American who died in the Benghazi terror attack continues to take a back seat.

The dustup between the Republican presidential nominee and Khizr Khan has gotten the headlines, but some are beginning to wonder why equal time isn’t being given to Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, who has challenged Pat Smith’s claims that Clinton told her the Benghazi attack started because of an anti-Muslim video. That origin story has since been proved false and emails sent by Clinton soon after the attack show the then-Secretary of State was aware the Sept. 11, 2012 assault was a coordinated terror strike.

“Why was Pat Smith’s grief minimized?” Trump pollster and senior advisor Kellyanne Conway told Bloomberg Politics on Sunday. “Media cover this election as a referendum on Trump while voters see it as a referendum on Hillary. That won’t change voters’ perspective.”

Meanwhile right-leaning sites such as Town Hall have published headlines blaring “Have we forgotten that Hillary Clinton pretty much called a Gold Star Mother a liar?”

Smith, the mother of Foreign Service officer Sean Smith, made a passionate speech at the Republican National Convention two weeks ago, mournfully remembering her dead son and laying the blame for his murder at Clinton’s feet. Pat Smith has repeatedly said Clinton blamed the anti-Muslim video for inspiring the Benghazi attacks, a charge Clinton has denied.

“Since then, I have repeatedly asked Hillary Clinton to explain to me the real reason why my son is dead,” Smith said during her RNC speech. “I’m still waiting.”
2016 Election Headquarters

The latest headlines on the 2016 elections from the biggest name in politics.
See Latest Coverage →

But Clinton said during a Sunday interview on “Fox News Sunday” that Smith must not have correctly remembered their conversation during the 2012 ceremony.

“As other members of families who lost loved ones have said, that’s not what they heard,” Clinton said. “I don’t hold any ill feeling for someone who in that moment may not fully recall everything that was or wasn’t said.”

Clinton’s response is nothing new. During a March Democratic debate, Clinton said of Smith, “I can’t imagine the grief she has about losing her son. But she’s wrong. She’s absolutely wrong.”

But the Clinton-Smith back-and-forth has seen little coverage as opposed to the attention given to the aftermath of Khan’s Thursday speech at the Democratic National Convention, when the father of dead soldier Capt. Humayun Khan rebuked Trump for his proposed Muslim immigration ban.

The squabble between Trump and Khan has morphed into a multi-day drama as Khan has continued appearing on news shows criticizing Trump and Trump has responded via his Twitter account, TV interviews and official campaign statements. Khan has said Trump is a “black soul” and Trump has responded that Khan had “no right” to criticize him on a national stage.

The public quarrel has drawn strong reactions from many top Republicans, who have praised Capt. Khan’s sacrifice and scolded Trump for his rhetoric. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., delivered a stinging critique on Monday morning, saying that “while our Party has bestowed upon him the nomination, it is not accompanied by unfettered license to defame those who are the best among us.”

[Stommped]

Threatening media with lawsuits for publishing things beyond the existing slander provision is in fact a first amendment attack.

Moreover his attitude towards his rallies and public politics in general leaves much to be desired.

Like the rally in Chicago that was denied to him because of protestors? Basically saying he doesn't have the right towards his first amendment?

And you can call it whatever you want, but I do believe the press has a responsibility to report the facts and not straight up lies, the consequences of the public not being able to trust any news whatsoever is too grave.

[mvaliz]

He must not follow politics because he clearly doesn't know any of Hillary's transgressions.

The funny thing is, if Dump did open libel laws - Hillary would win millions for the Benghazi smears.

Way to fall on your own sword... Claming suing for factual errors, than endorse the Hillary conspiracies.

But hypocracy rins rampant with the likes of you and zukie and the other Dumpsters who have destroied the Republican party

[Elegiac]

Like the rally in Chicago that was denied to him because of protestors? Basically saying he doesn't have the right towards his first amendment?

First Amendment protections have to do with state interaction with speech, not between citizens.

I mean, if he's banning signs and 'professional cameras' at his rallies what assurance do we have that he won't attempt to do it if he becomes President?

And you can call it whatever you want, but I do believe the press has a responsibility to report the facts and not straight up lies, the consequences of the public not being able to trust any news whatsoever is too grave.

Cool story. The existing anti-slander law already accomplishes this.

- - - Updated - - -

She's said and done plenty

I don't recall her inviting a foreign government to engage in illegal activity and interfere with the political process using the fruits of said activity.

[zenkai]

First Amendment protections have to do with state interaction with speech, not between citizens.

I mean, if he's banning signs and 'professional cameras' at his rallies what assurance do we have that he won't attempt to do it if he becomes President?



Cool story. The existing anti-slander law already accomplishes this.

- - - Updated - - -



I don't recall her inviting a foreign government to engage in illegal activity and interfere with the political process using the fruits of said activity.

Doesn't bother me, wish they would expose the RNC too.

[Theodarzna]

I personally think both campaigns were wrong for dragging mothers and fathers of dead folks out.

[Elegiac]

Doesn't bother me, wish they would expose the RNC too.

I forgot you were one of those 'burn the world' nihilist types.

[mvaliz]

Like the rally in Chicago that was denied to him because of protestors? Basically saying he doesn't have the right towards his first amendment?

And you can call it whatever you want, but I do believe the press has a responsibility to report the facts and not straight up lies, the consequences of the public not being able to trust any news whatsoever is too grave.

Donald Dump claims facts about him are lies. You damn well know this!

Oh, abd Chicago protesters were exersizing their right to free speech too. Not denying his. The first amnendment applies to the government silencing citizens - not the other way around. You are free to boo people you don't like till they leave.

[Bollocks]

Well, there is a reason that some on the left have been fighting against trickle down economics, all the while the "neo-liberals" have been paying mouth service of how bad it is, but not actually doing anything to change the system.

I really hope the use of neoliberalism is not serious. A mandatory reading for anyone who:

1) Claims to know what neoliberalism

2) Blames current problems on neoliberalism



http://www.econlib.org/library/Colum...iberalism.html

Also blaming free trade for the loss jobs is an ignorant claim. Yes free trade costs some jobs, but ultimately automation eats jobs.

[Orbitus]

You can't find different sources that support any argument you want to make when it comes to polling numbers, the sample sizes are just never big enough. Such as the LA Times daily polling which shows no significant bump for Hillary at all post convention, still trailing Trump nationally.

- - - Updated - - -



Is there any source for this claim other than wishful thinking?

This LA Times source is from BEFORE the DNC. It is from July 15th, the DNC was from the 25-28th. If you are going to try to debunk a claim, don't try to use an old article.

[Felya]

That logic didn't help John Kerry v. Bush. I wouldn't depend on "fear of Trump," motivating actually going to the polls.

Because it wasn't like that in Bush v Kerry. Bush was running as a war time president and it was unAmerican to go against the wars. At the time, we were just a couple of years removed from starting the war and even thought it was already looking like the quagmire that it is, it was political suicide to argue against the war.

It's why the Swiftboat lie and Kerry's anti-war history were such a big deal. It painted Kerry as unAmerican and soft on punishing those who were responsible for 9/11. Bush was not the fuck up he is known for now, but had a near 65% approval rating at the end of his first term:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/116500/pr...orge-bush.aspx

Your assertion relies on Bush being a dumb ass as the common belief it is now. Bush went from a hight of post 9/11 support at 90%, to bottoming out during the economic collapse at 25%. Bush didn't have the hate out of the gate that Obama did. There was no 'you lied'. There was no questioning his birth certificate, religion or political affiliation. The GOP platform when nominating Bush in 2000, seems downright progressive, compared to what we got a couple of weeks ago.

The biggest differance I can show you in Trump's treatment in comparison to Bush, is Trump's "bomb the shit out of them and give their oil to Exxon". Everyone who claimed that about Bush is labeled as a conspiracy nut. Trump does it and gets cheered. Bush never stooped as low as Trump does and even asserting the sort of crap Trump wilfuly admits, would get you marked as a conspiracy theorist.

[Orbitus]

The LA Times poll was not post convention. It was taken during the convention.

It was taken BEFORE the convention. The post is from the 15th of July. The Convention was the 23rd-28th.

[Felya]

In your last statement didn't you kind of prove my point? We could never prove that 3 jackpots in a row wasn't just an anomaly, but that doesn't change the fact that if we are dealing in the realm of probability, DeNiro HAS to fire him, which he does.

Uhm... No, the reason DeNiro has to fire him, is because it's written in a script of a fictional movie. If me showing that guilt without proof hinges on bias proves your point, then I'm not sure what your point is in the first place.

[Stommped]

This LA Times source is from BEFORE the DNC. It is from July 15th, the DNC was from the 25-28th. If you are going to try to debunk a claim, don't try to use an old article.

The article was written on the 15th but the polls are updated daily, see graph at top

- - - Updated - - -

Uhm... No, the reason DeNiro has to fire him, is because it's written in a script of a fictional movie. If me showing that guilt without proof hinges on bias proves your point, then I'm not sure what your point is in the first place.

He fires him in the movie because thats what any casino manager would do... We dont deal in the 1 in 10000000000000000000000 realm, we deal in reality. The slot machines were rigged and he was either in on it or too incompetent to know any better

And Im sure you know that movie is based on a true story, so that part may or may not be fictional

[zenkai]

I forgot you were one of those 'burn the world' nihilist types.

Nope, I'm about exposing corruption and keeping people honest.

[Cthulhu 2020]

Manufacturing is dead by an act of policy, not some hand of God(s) but actual policy that made it happen. That is why I call people like you Paulannish, you act like things are just fine and what bad things happen are just hand of God acts.

The fact is there aren't reasonably enough jobs. And there is no chance of any big government spending coming in even under a Hillary presidency.

So things will continue to deteriorate.

Act of policy? Which policies? Are you referring to the policies that make manufacturing more expensive here, because the companies have to treat their workers like humans rather than wage slaves? Yes, there is those policies. But when faced with two decisions, hiring American workers at a higher cost but more benefit to our society, and sending manufacturing overseas and paying destitutely poor people pennies per hour, what have all of these companies decided to do in the end?

Yes, it is the company's fault, and we need to hold them responsible for it. We could of course reverse policy that protects workers from exploitation, because that would be a REALLY SMART thing to do.

- - - Updated - - -

Trump says stupid shit

Hillary breaks laws

Trump does a lot of borderline illegal stuff and gets away with it. Trump has been the subject of many civil cases where he actively scammed people and broke civil law.

Seriously, you people seem to love to research Hillary's past, but when it comes to Trump you only pay attention to the present. Probably because taking even a cursory glance into Trump's past reveals corruption, incompetence and borderline criminal behavior that is indefensible.

- - - Updated - - -

Nope, I'm about exposing corruption and keeping people honest.

You have a very obvious bias as you keep going after Hillary, and yet the apologism for Trump is strong.