RE: The Clinton Legacy

RE: The Clinton Legacy (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Lucylastic -> RE: The Clinton Legacy (4/2/2017 8:11:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods Yep. I know Chelsea's married to a jew, but I don't think she's converted to Judaism, has she? dunno and really dont care, but I was thinking more about the nepotism on show right now. but everyone loves it a clinton and they turn back into butthurt shite hawks. it keeps them from coming up with the right wing denialism over the russian connection.

WhoreMods -> RE: The Clinton Legacy (4/2/2017 8:15:27 AM)
I find the double standards hilarious myself. There's only a few of them who genuinely seem to be so stupid that they wouldn't realise they're doing it, so I have no idea what's going on with the rest of them. (Hi, Sanity!)

BoscoX -> RE: The Clinton Legacy (4/2/2017 8:30:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MercTech Are you surprised that the daughter of a picked and groomed mouthpiece for the elite would put their scion forward to try and build a dynasty? One way to look at it. Fits. Already a cog in the machine, too.

BoscoX -> RE: The Clinton Legacy (4/2/2017 9:11:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata [image]http://thepeoplescube.com/images/various_uploads/Chelsea_Tweet_Lincoln.jpg[/image] Yes, Chelsea. It's photoshopped. Gawd help us. Chelsea Clinton fuels speculation of political run K. What, you mean like in a store or something?

DesideriScuri -> RE: The Clinton Legacy (4/2/2017 3:08:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri Clinton lost because she was a worst (barely, imo) candidate than Trump. Really? And there was me thinking that she lost because the left refused to vote for her as they'd been hoping that Bernie Sanders might get the democrat nomination instead. In other words, Hillary wasn't even good enough to vote for against Trump. So, even some Democrat voters preferred Trump over Clinton. That kinda lines up with my assertion.

BamaD -> RE: The Clinton Legacy (4/2/2017 3:28:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri Clinton lost because she was a worst (barely, imo) candidate than Trump. Really? And there was me thinking that she lost because the left refused to vote for her as they'd been hoping that Bernie Sanders might get the democrat nomination instead. In other words, Hillary wasn't even good enough to vote for against Trump. So, even some Democrat voters preferred Trump over Clinton. That kinda lines up with my assertion. This election was between Gollum (Trump) and Sauron (Clinton). Gollum wouldn't be my choice but Sauron would be so much worse.

igor2003 -> RE: The Clinton Legacy (4/2/2017 3:31:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri Clinton lost because she was a worst (barely, imo) candidate than Trump. Really? And there was me thinking that she lost because the left refused to vote for her as they'd been hoping that Bernie Sanders might get the democrat nomination instead. In other words, Hillary wasn't even good enough to vote for against Trump. So, even some Democrat voters preferred Trump over Clinton. That kinda lines up with my assertion. Personally, I don't think either one of you has it quite right. Hillary lost for only one reason. Democratic voters, and fence riding voters all KNEW that Trump could not win. So they just didn't bother going out to vote. Why go out of their way when everyone KNEW Trump could not win? So everyone just stayed home, except the Trump voters, of which, there weren't all that many.

DesideriScuri -> RE: The Clinton Legacy (4/2/2017 4:09:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: igor2003 quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri Clinton lost because she was a worst (barely, imo) candidate than Trump. Really? And there was me thinking that she lost because the left refused to vote for her as they'd been hoping that Bernie Sanders might get the democrat nomination instead. In other words, Hillary wasn't even good enough to vote for against Trump. So, even some Democrat voters preferred Trump over Clinton. That kinda lines up with my assertion. Personally, I don't think either one of you has it quite right. Hillary lost for only one reason. Democratic voters, and fence riding voters all KNEW that Trump could not win. So they just didn't bother going out to vote. Why go out of their way when everyone KNEW Trump could not win? So everyone just stayed home, except the Trump voters, of which, there weren't all that many. Well, there were enough Trump voters, regardless of how many there were or weren't. Hillary's campaign - with a yuuuge assist from the MSM - is one of the major reasons everyone knew he couldn't win and she would win walking away.

Edwird -> RE: The Clinton Legacy (4/2/2017 4:18:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri Clinton lost because she was a worst (barely, imo) candidate than Trump. Really? And there was me thinking that she lost because the left refused to vote for her as they'd been hoping that Bernie Sanders might get the democrat nomination instead. In other words, Hillary wasn't even good enough to vote for against Trump. So, even some Democrat voters preferred Trump over Clinton. That kinda lines up with my assertion. Uh, no, actually. Unfortunately, your lack of basic reading comprehension, as it turns out, seems to be representative of the situation at hand during the recent voting process. The poster you responded to said nothing of the sort, but rather was alluding to (generally) those who voted for the Libertarian or Green Party candidates or Bernie write-ins, or, that Democrats, in large numbers, boycotted the whole thing and just stayed home. But even after all that, it's hard to explain how 'Democrat voters preferred Trump' when she won the popular vote by 3 million. So given your take on the outcome, apparently there were a number of Republican voters who 'preferred Clinton over Trump.' Wowie zowie. To state it plainly: none of the above could in any way be considered as 'Democrat voters preferred Trump over Clinton.' If you are presented with two movies to watch, and you don't like either of them and decline to attend at all, does that mean you 'preferred' the film most attended by others?

BoscoX -> RE: The Clinton Legacy (4/2/2017 5:10:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: igor2003 quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri Clinton lost because she was a worst (barely, imo) candidate than Trump. Really? And there was me thinking that she lost because the left refused to vote for her as they'd been hoping that Bernie Sanders might get the democrat nomination instead. In other words, Hillary wasn't even good enough to vote for against Trump. So, even some Democrat voters preferred Trump over Clinton. That kinda lines up with my assertion. Personally, I don't think either one of you has it quite right. Hillary lost for only one reason. Democratic voters, and fence riding voters all KNEW that Trump could not win. So they just didn't bother going out to vote. Why go out of their way when everyone KNEW Trump could not win? So everyone just stayed home, except the Trump voters, of which, there weren't all that many. Well, there were enough Trump voters, regardless of how many there were or weren't. Hillary's campaign - with a yuuuge assist from the MSM - is one of the major reasons everyone knew he couldn't win and she would win walking away. Because the Hillary campaign believed the anti-Trump MSM propaganda, they failed to base her campaign in reality That she was practically unelectable helped

BamaD -> RE: The Clinton Legacy (4/2/2017 5:27:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BoscoX quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: igor2003 quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri Clinton lost because she was a worst (barely, imo) candidate than Trump. Really? And there was me thinking that she lost because the left refused to vote for her as they'd been hoping that Bernie Sanders might get the democrat nomination instead. In other words, Hillary wasn't even good enough to vote for against Trump. So, even some Democrat voters preferred Trump over Clinton. That kinda lines up with my assertion. Personally, I don't think either one of you has it quite right. Hillary lost for only one reason. Democratic voters, and fence riding voters all KNEW that Trump could not win. So they just didn't bother going out to vote. Why go out of their way when everyone KNEW Trump could not win? So everyone just stayed home, except the Trump voters, of which, there weren't all that many. Well, there were enough Trump voters, regardless of how many there were or weren't. Hillary's campaign - with a yuuuge assist from the MSM - is one of the major reasons everyone knew he couldn't win and she would win walking away. Because the Hillary campaign believed the anti-Trump MSM propaganda, they failed to base her campaign in reality That she was practically unelectable helped The "why am I not 50 points ahead" ads by Hillary were just stupid. It made her look arrogant and it focused people on why people would vote for Trump.

Musicmystery -> RE: The Clinton Legacy (4/2/2017 6:07:33 PM)
She IS arrogant. "It's my turn, I'm a woman, and I'm not Trump, so of course everyone will vote for me" is not a campaign. It's hubris. And myopia.

Edwird -> RE: The Clinton Legacy (4/2/2017 6:17:36 PM)
There was a lot more militating against HRC than just her adverts, and long before that for any thinking person. No one cared about her alleged 'superior' attitude or 'hoity toity' demeanor, from the Democrat side. Just get the job done and rid the country of the corporate oligarchy, and who cares about the rest. She gave no plausible impression she was going to do that, as it turns out, whereas Trump convinced the easily convinced he was going to do that, then proceeded to install every corporate oligarch he could find after the election. Suck-ers.

DesideriScuri -> RE: The Clinton Legacy (4/3/2017 9:45:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Edwird quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri Clinton lost because she was a worst (barely, imo) candidate than Trump. Really? And there was me thinking that she lost because the left refused to vote for her as they'd been hoping that Bernie Sanders might get the democrat nomination instead. In other words, Hillary wasn't even good enough to vote for against Trump. So, even some Democrat voters preferred Trump over Clinton. That kinda lines up with my assertion. Uh, no, actually. Unfortunately, your lack of basic reading comprehension, as it turns out, seems to be representative of the situation at hand during the recent voting process. The poster you responded to said nothing of the sort, but rather was alluding to (generally) those who voted for the Libertarian or Green Party candidates or Bernie write-ins, or, that Democrats, in large numbers, boycotted the whole thing and just stayed home. But even after all that, it's hard to explain how 'Democrat voters preferred Trump' when she won the popular vote by 3 million. So given your take on the outcome, apparently there were a number of Republican voters who 'preferred Clinton over Trump.' Wowie zowie. To state it plainly: none of the above could in any way be considered as 'Democrat voters preferred Trump over Clinton.' If you are presented with two movies to watch, and you don't like either of them and decline to attend at all, does that mean you 'preferred' the film most attended by others? You seem to be lacking in logic skills here. Democrat Voter1: I want Bernie to win the nomination! DNC: Hillary is the nominee. Democrat Voter1: I wanted Bernie, so I'm not going to vote for Hillary, even if that means Trump wins. Thus, Democrat Voter1 chose to not support the Democrat candidate - Hllary Clinton - even though in doing so, it could easily mean the Trump wins the election. Apparently, that was preferable to Hillary winning. That has nothing to do with third party candidates, either.

Edwird -> RE: The Clinton Legacy (4/3/2017 10:06:06 AM)
You are assuming that every otherwise Democrat voter who stayed at home was apprised ahead of the outcome as to the actual outcome, so as to thereby effectively 'vote for Trump,' by way of not voting for anybody. It's not me who's having the logical conniption, here.

DesideriScuri -> RE: The Clinton Legacy (4/3/2017 10:44:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Edwird You are assuming that every otherwise Democrat voter who stayed at home was apprised ahead of the outcome as to the actual outcome, so as to thereby effectively 'vote for Trump,' by way of not voting for anybody. It's not me who's having the logical conniption, here. Of course it's not you. You're not able to follow logic well enough to have a conniption. People vote, primarily, for 2 reasons in our 2-party system: 1. They want their candidate/party to win the election. 2. They don't want the other candidate/party to win the election. Democrat voters who didn't go vote for Hillary were not motivated enough to vote for Hillary, or vote against Trump. They would rather have risked Trump winning than vote for Hillary. That's sadly amazing.

Edwird -> RE: The Clinton Legacy (4/3/2017 11:49:57 AM)
Not following your misguided and twisted thinking (such as latter could be called) is not the same as following or not following any discernible logic, let's have that out of the way first. Never in history other than by your warped head has a non-vote been a 'vote for' anybody. I know firsthand a couple of otherwise Republican voters who stayed home out of disgust (one of them being my downstairs professor emeritus neighbor), does that mean they 'voted for Clinton'? As to further inquiry into your addled brain; "1. They want their candidate/party to win the election. 2. They don't want the other candidate/party to win the election." Says you. So then, anybody who voted for Gary Johnson or Jill Stein, knowing full well their candidate had no chance in hell of winning, and even no one at the time having any idea who would win at all, nevertheless means they all 'voted for Trump in preference to Clinton.' Carry on.

DesideriScuri -> RE: The Clinton Legacy (4/3/2017 11:55:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Edwird Not following your misguided and twisted thinking (such as latter could be called) is not the same as following or not following discernible logic, let's have that out of the way first. To a warped mind, the straight and narrow looks warped. If you can't follow basic logic, it's not up to me to lead you by the nose to it. Be well.

Edwird -> RE: The Clinton Legacy (4/3/2017 12:07:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri You're not alone in underestimating the 'ennui and abject apathy' (non-) vote, as the media have done for decades. This is not the first election where people abstained, much as that may be a shock to you.

Musicmystery -> RE: The Clinton Legacy (4/3/2017 12:14:56 PM)
BOTH of you are ignoring that the majority of voters are Independents.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125