Hillary Clinton: just because she deserves her own thread
POSTED BY: SIGNYM
UPDATED: Saturday, September 27, 2025 01:07
VIEWED: 114591
PAGE 42 of 46
Are polls = reality?
Let me just point out that the author left out vital relevant facts in the opinion piece. Doing that is known as cherry-picking. And whether you do that in the news, in discussion, in debate or in opinion, when you distort the facts, you've changed the nature of your communication into propaganda. But WE don't have any of THAT in the US, do we?!
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
There are many, many problems with hillary. She breaks countries and starts wars wherever she goes. Right now, she and obama are drumming up war fever JUST TO WIN THE ELECTION. Never mind that it's not against some small hapless country full of brown people that most voters can't find on a map. No, hillary and obama are aiming a Russia, a fully capable nuclear equal. I wonder if they've considered that the Russian response to their war-mongering might be something they can't just turn off after the election.
hillary as a president would have zero power to keep her many, many empty promises. And she knows that, but it doesn't stop her from making them anyway, because people really are that gullible. So, why not? But even more than that, hillary herself doesn't believe them, as the leaked documents show. hillary is an empty husk of a person when it comes to integrity.
hillary is completely corrupt, mixing state power with personal gain, as the leaked emails about pay-to-play as Secy of State and her toadying speeches to GS show.
And there's the billary issue - co-abusers of women and children, equal, if not worse than anyone else on the campaign trail.
But the BIGGEST problem with hillary is her finger on the nuclear button. Having left Iraq, Libya, Ukraine and Syria in unfixable smoking ruins, and unable to admit or even understand that she was wrong, surrounded by her equally deluded neocons in the State Department, military and CIA who also think a nuclear war is winnable, deaf to warnings, she'd turn her attention toward Russia - with her fat finger on the nuclear button and US policy to launch nuclear weapons FIRST in her waddling hip pocket. Given her unblemished history of failure, I can't imagine anything could possibly go wrong.
Let me just point out that the author left out vital relevant facts in the opinion piece. Doing that is known as cherry-picking. And whether you do that in the news, in discussion, in debate or in opinion, when you distort the facts, you've changed the nature of your communication into propaganda. But WE don't have any of THAT in the US, do we?!
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
There are many, many problems with hillary. She breaks countries and starts wars wherever she goes. Right now, she and obama are drumming up war fever JUST TO WIN THE ELECTION. Never mind that it's not against some small hapless country full of brown people that most voters can't find on a map. No, hillary and obama are aiming a Russia, a fully capable nuclear equal. I wonder if they've considered that the Russian response to their war-mongering might be something they can't just turn off after the election.
hillary as a president would have zero power to keep her many, many empty promises. And she knows that, but it doesn't stop her from making them anyway, because people really are that gullible. So, why not? But even more than that, hillary herself doesn't believe them, as the leaked documents show. hillary is an empty husk of a person when it comes to integrity.
hillary is completely corrupt, mixing state power with personal gain, as the leaked emails about pay-to-play as Secy of State and her toadying speeches to GS show.
And there's the billary issue - co-abusers of women and children, equal, if not worse than anyone else on the campaign trail.
But the BIGGEST problem with hillary is her finger on the nuclear button. Having left Iraq, Libya, Ukraine and Syria in unfixable smoking ruins, and unable to admit or even understand that she was wrong, surrounded by her equally deluded neocons in the State Department, military and CIA who also think a nuclear war is winnable, deaf to warnings, she'd turn her attention toward Russia - with her fat finger on the nuclear button and US policy to launch nuclear weapons FIRST in her waddling hip pocket. Given her unblemished history of failure, I can't imagine anything could possibly go wrong.
President: National poll results
Hillary Clinton (D) 45% (+7.00)
Donald Trump (R) 38%
Gary Johnson (L) 6%
____________________________________________
Russia trolls get contract extension
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?bid=18&tid=60719
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
Are polls = reality?
They are your worst reality
President: National poll results
Hillary Clinton (D) 45% (+7.00)
Donald Trump (R) 38%
Gary Johnson (L) 6%
____________________________________________
Russia trolls get contract extension
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?bid=18&tid=60719
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
SIG, 1kiki pay attention.
Rumor check: Man behind Clinton Foundation ‘invoice’ circulated on social media admits it is fake
The man behind the meme, identified only as Chris, told The Daily Beast that he intentionally fabricates documents he then calls “leaked” in an effort to get internet users to be more discerning about what they believe — but people fall for it. 
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2016/10/17/rumor-check-man-behind-clin
ton-foundation-invoice-circulated-on-social-media-admits-it-is-fake/
____________________________________________
Russia trolls get contract extension
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?bid=18&tid=60719
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I don't go to 'social media' for my news. Do you?
Let me just point out that the author left out vital relevant facts in the opinion piece. Doing that is known as cherry-picking. And whether you do that in the news, in discussion, in debate or in opinion, when you distort the facts, you've changed the nature of your communication into propaganda. But WE don't have any of THAT in the US, do we?!
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I'm resurrecting this thread as an analysis of what went wrong with Hillary, and the democratic party - which seem like they can get their act together, still.
http://www.salon.com/2017/03/04/susan-sarandon-was-right-she-warned-us
-hillary-was-doomed-liberals-didnt-want-to-listen/
Susan Sarandon was right: She warned us Hillary was doomed; liberals didn’t want to listen
No, she didn't elect Trump — and it's easier for liberals to hate on Sarandon than to face their own hypocrisy
Danielle Ryan
Remember that time when Susan Sarandon said she wouldn’t vote for Hillary Clinton and all hell broke lose in liberal land?
The actress and activist — who had previously been a vocal Bernie Sanders supporter — told MSNBC’s Chris Hayes in March last year that although she hadn’t decided which person to vote for, “some people” felt that Donald Trump would “bring the revolution immediately” — whereas Clinton was all about “shoring up the status quo.”
This naturally led to cries of outrage from the Clintonista center-left. Sarandon is not a good feminist, they seethed. She’s a traitor to the liberal cause, they fumed. She would put the country at risk. It was people like her, they said, that risked putting Trump in office. This went on for a while, with articles popping up all over the place condemning Sarandon for not falling in line with the rest of politically-conscious Hollywood. Newsweek writer Kurt Eichenwald called out Sarandon’s “narcissistic purity” on Twitter and blamed her for Trump’s win.
Sarandon was back on Hayes’ show recently and was asked this time how she felt now that Trump had won. There was a strong undercurrent of blame throughout the interview: The implication from Hayes was that Sarandon should get down on her knees, grovel and apologize profusely for failing to vote for Clinton. Much to his obvious disappointment, she defended her earlier comments and even doubled down on them.
But here’s the thing: If liberals weren’t too busy tweeting abuse at Sarandon and writing think pieces about her white privilege, they might just be able to see that she makes some salient points about the American political system, the media and the Trump presidency.
So, liberals, hold your fire for a second, and let’s look at this with an open mind.
1. It’s uncomfortable for Clinton supporters to admit this, but the fact is, Sarandon was awake when many Democrats weren’t. She was a vocal supporter of Sanders, the only truly progressive candidate with any chance of securing the nomination. Clinton was a status quo candidate and, as Sarandon has pointed out, if you back the status quo when people are desperate for change, “you’re going to have a difficult time.”
We’ll never know if Sanders could have beaten Trump, but we do know that Clinton could not. We know that the Democrats allowed Clinton to run a status quo campaign when people were hungry for revolution. We also know they schemed and connived against Sanders and paid the price. For that, Sarandon can’t be blamed.
2. Now, how ’bout that revolution? Sarandon was right there, too. OK, “revolution” may be too strong a word. But she is correct in saying that Trump’s presidency has woken up people in a way that never would have happened if Clinton had won. The popular retort to this is: Oh, but Clinton would have been much better than Trump. So there would have been no need for revolution! Therein lies the crux of the liberal con.
While Trump is brash and in-your-face about his awful policies, Obama and Clinton simply put a kinder, sugarcoated face on some of the very same things. Take fracking, for example. Fracking boomed under Obama. At one point, Clinton even tried to tar the image of anti-fracking environmentalists by linking them to a Russian plot to hamper the U.S. energy industry.
“Gasland” director Josh Fox — whose 2010 documentary went a long way toward reshaping progressive consciousness of the fracking issue — said the following in the same MSNBC episode with Sarandon:
Obama is the one that’s left us with the
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Maybe you should actually read that G. It comes from a legit Liberal.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
And from an ultra-neoliberal, Hillary-or-bust source.
How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
About that liberal media: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2017/4/26/1621562/-AP-s-Clinton-Foundati
on-non-scandal-was-the-worst-journalistic-malpractice-of-the-2016-election
----------------------------
DUZ XaT SEM RiT TQ YQ? - Jubal Early
http://www.7532020.com
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME