[quote]pushharder wrote:
Too much smoke in the Clinton forest for the past 25 years. Everything from wisps to towering billows.
There’s fires in there somewhere. Plenty of 'em.[/quote]
But is there enough to keep enough people from voting for her? People will overlook a lot of shit and still vote the way they want to. Our liberal media sure is hell isn’t going to fan the flames of that smoke.
I still think Hilary is going to win.
[quote]on edge wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
Too much smoke in the Clinton forest for the past 25 years. Everything from wisps to towering billows.
There’s fires in there somewhere. Plenty of 'em.[/quote]
But is there enough to keep enough people from voting for her? People will overlook a lot of shit and still vote the way they want to. Our liberal media sure is hell isn’t going to fan the flames of that smoke.
I still think Hilary is going to win.[/quote]
I’m not so sure about that. The “liberal” media has been asking a lot of questions about her lately and asking her to come clean on issues. She isn’t going to get a pass and I think some on the left are still hoping she goes down while they still have a chance to run someone else.
Better to lose a candidate now than during the general.
H factor wrote:
…Better to lose a candidate now than during the general…
I have to wonder if part of the “Clinton Strategy” is to get the most damaging things out early? (A year and a half is truly an “eternity” in Politics).
Or will it really matter, since “attack ads” will surely keep the Clintons misdeeds in the American consciousness?
I really don’t have an answer…but rest assured that there IS a strategy at play in all this.
Mufasa
Another issue that is being highlighted in this thread is one that we’ve discussed many times before:
Voting FOR someone or something will often win over voting AGAINST someone or something.
Hillary certainly has a lot of baggage…but the GOP is going to have to come up with reasons to Vote FOR their candidate if they hope to win.
But ultimately, who knows. Maybe the “Hillary Hate” is enough for the GOP to take the Presidency.
Mufasa
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
This Uranium thing is blowing up all over the conservative circuit. But if I recall, she was one of seven cabinet members that approved it, so while I feel she is definitely guilty of taking bribes, the corruption of the entire Obama administration should be looked into as well. I mean who in their right mind would allow Russia to control twenty fucking percent of OUR Uranium reserves?[/quote]
That is a good point about the seven other cabinet members votes. I think that once the State Department said the Russians were Kosher to deal with it would have been difficult for the lower ranking cabinet members to raise objections. Lest we forget this was after they had deployed “the reset button”.
In fact I am starting to wonder if there was some hidden meaning or symbolism behind that ridiculous stunt that related to the uranium deal. It has been my observation that there is something about the criminal mind that when it gets too easy to get away with doing dirt they tend to become more brazen because they aren’t getting the same thrill that they are used to.
To me in that video she has always seemed way too gleeful and amused in what should have been a serious moment. It’s like she is getting more out of it than the Russians are. Then there is Lavrov saying that the lettering on the button doesn’t say reset, it says “overcharged”. To me even back then it seemed more like an inside joke than a simple misspelling.
Hillary Clinton presents misspelled gift to Russian foreign minister - YouTube
[quote]Sifu wrote:It has been my observation that there is something about the criminal mind that when it gets too easy to get away with doing dirt they tend to become more brazen because they aren’t getting the same thrill that they are used to.
To me in that video she has always seemed way too gleeful and amused in what should have been a serious moment. It’s like she is getting more out of it than the Russians are. Then there is Lavrov saying that the lettering on the button doesn’t say reset, it says “overcharged”. To me even back then it seemed more like an inside joke than a simple misspelling.
[/quote]
Interesting points.
The misspelling is either case of a retard having too much responsibility, or it was exactly what they wanted. Either way it’s an embarrassment.
[quote]Aggv wrote:
[quote]Sifu wrote:It has been my observation that there is something about the criminal mind that when it gets too easy to get away with doing dirt they tend to become more brazen because they aren’t getting the same thrill that they are used to.
To me in that video she has always seemed way too gleeful and amused in what should have been a serious moment. It’s like she is getting more out of it than the Russians are. Then there is Lavrov saying that the lettering on the button doesn’t say reset, it says “overcharged”. To me even back then it seemed more like an inside joke than a simple misspelling.
[/quote]
Interesting points.
The misspelling is either case of a retard having too much responsibility, or it was exactly what they wanted. Either way it’s an embarrassment. [/quote]
I have a hard time buying the someone made a mistake excuse. The state department takes interpretation of communications to the Russians very seriously. They don’t hire amateurs to do their interpreting for them.
The book isn’t out yet, correct?
[quote]on edge wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
Too much smoke in the Clinton forest for the past 25 years. Everything from wisps to towering billows.
There’s fires in there somewhere. Plenty of 'em.[/quote]
But is there enough to keep enough people from voting for her? People will overlook a lot of shit and still vote the way they want to. Our liberal media sure is hell isn’t going to fan the flames of that smoke.
I still think Hilary is going to win.[/quote]
Rest assured Hillary is NOT going to win. After four years of Obama the republican base is highly motivated to get out and vote. Just about any republican candidate running a really good campaign will defeat her.
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
H factor wrote:
…Better to lose a candidate now than during the general…
I have to wonder if part of the “Clinton Strategy” is to get the most damaging things out early? (A year and a half is truly an “eternity” in Politics).
Or will it really matter, since “attack ads” will surely keep the Clintons misdeeds in the American consciousness?
I really don’t have an answer…but rest assured that there IS a strategy at play in all this.
Mufasa[/quote]
The strategy is coming from the far left. It’s called “ditch Hillary.” She’s not liberal enough for the runaway left.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
The book isn’t out yet, correct? [/quote]
It’s not scheduled to be released until May fifth. All this controversy now is just the preliminaries based upon a handful of what is in that book.
Also these preliminaries are only what has been revealed about the Clinton Foundation. The latest revelation today, is that is not the only foundation the Clinton’s have. Apparently they have several foundations setup and they have all been passing money back and forth to each other, like a dummy corporation shell
Great American Republic • Articulating American Principles & Values.
^That’s what I thought.
The author (Peter something or other) is working on a similar look at Jeb Bush. I believe it’s due out this summer.
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
[quote]H factor wrote:
You could clothe the world with the dirty laundry Clinton has in her closet. Same could be said for most lifetime politicians.
I think the Democrats best hope is her to lose/drop out for whatever reason. She will lose in the general. You can’t be a populist anti-Wall Street warrior when you’ve been in the crony capitalism game for decades. People are going to see right through the ruse. [/quote]
Obama duped the American people about him being against Wall Street, when in fact he took more money from Wall Street than any politician in history.
“The president has raised more money from Wall Street through the Democratic National Committee and his campaign account than any politician in American history.”
People will always fall for bullshit.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1111/67770.html[/quote]
Ironically, Hillary would have been a better president than obama.
[quote]pat wrote:
Ironically, (…) would have been a better president than obama. [/quote]
We could start another thread with everyone who would have been a better president.
I’d much rather have had John Stewart in the oval office the past 8 years. Shit, puff daddy would have worked out better and would have appeased the racists.
[quote]H factor wrote:
[quote]on edge wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
Too much smoke in the Clinton forest for the past 25 years. Everything from wisps to towering billows.
There’s fires in there somewhere. Plenty of 'em.[/quote]
But is there enough to keep enough people from voting for her? People will overlook a lot of shit and still vote the way they want to. Our liberal media sure is hell isn’t going to fan the flames of that smoke.
I still think Hilary is going to win.[/quote]
I’m not so sure about that. The “liberal” media has been asking a lot of questions about her lately and asking her to come clean on issues. She isn’t going to get a pass and I think some on the left are still hoping she goes down while they still have a chance to run someone else.
Better to lose a candidate now than during the general. [/quote]
I agree, something about Hilary rubs people the wrong way, though I cannot put my finger on what it is about her that people do not like. This goes for liberals as well as republicans. I do not think the democrats have a better candidate though. Maybe somebody will come out of the woodwork like obama in '08, but I don’t see another viable candidate. I think the candidacy is hers for the taking, scandals be damned.
I do think that this is a legit scandal where the whole email thing smelled like a witch hunt.
Again…I just don’t think that “Hating Hillary” will be enough for the
GOP to win.
The GOP candidate will have to 1) paint a clear vision for the direction that they will take America AND 2) make sure that they are coming across as likable and worth someone’s vote.
I just don’t think that hating Hillary will be enough.
Mufasa
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]H factor wrote:
[quote]on edge wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
Too much smoke in the Clinton forest for the past 25 years. Everything from wisps to towering billows.
There’s fires in there somewhere. Plenty of 'em.[/quote]
But is there enough to keep enough people from voting for her? People will overlook a lot of shit and still vote the way they want to. Our liberal media sure is hell isn’t going to fan the flames of that smoke.
I still think Hilary is going to win.[/quote]
I’m not so sure about that. The “liberal” media has been asking a lot of questions about her lately and asking her to come clean on issues. She isn’t going to get a pass and I think some on the left are still hoping she goes down while they still have a chance to run someone else.
Better to lose a candidate now than during the general. [/quote]
I agree, something about Hilary rubs people the wrong way, though I cannot put my finger on what it is about her that people do not like. This goes for liberals as well as republicans. I do not think the democrats have a better candidate though. Maybe somebody will come out of the woodwork like obama in '08, but I don’t see another viable candidate. I think the candidacy is hers for the taking, scandals be damned.
I do think that this is a legit scandal where the whole email thing smelled like a witch hunt. [/quote]
Here I’ll put a finger on it for you. She is an insincere, fake as hell, phoney lying piece of shit and people can see it.
The Democrats are doing themselves a huge disservice by not having anyone challenge her in the primary. That is their opportunity to see is she still is a viable candidate. If she can’t get past a friendly challenger from her own party there is no way she can get past a determined Republican.
How could you say the email server scandal was a witch hunt? Laws clearly were broken. Nobody wipes a server that is a target of a subpoena risking criminal charges for obstruction of justice and destruction of evidence because they are protecting their Yoga routine. I am disappointed that they haven’t gone after the lawyers who were involved and threatened them with disbarment.
“…Insincere, fake as hell, phoney lying piece of shit…”
Sounds like most Politicians to me.
Mufasa