Hillary Rodham Clinton

Post Reply
User avatar
TollandRCR
Posts: 20731
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 11:17 pm
Location: RIP, my friend. - Foggy

Re: Hillary Rodham Clinton

#101

Post by TollandRCR » Tue Mar 13, 2018 4:37 pm

What good does it do us to think and speak as Clinton spoke in India?
“The truth is, we know so little about life, we don’t really know what the good news is and what the bad news is.” Kurt Vonnegut

User avatar
Orlylicious
Posts: 10182
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 4:02 pm
Location: With Pete Buttigieg and the other "open and defiant homosexuals" --Bryan Fischer AFA
Occupation: "Do Nothing Democrat Savage" -- Donald, 9/28/19 and "Scalawag...Part of an extreme, malicious leftist internet social mob working in concert with weaponized, socialized governments to target and injure political opponents.” -- Walt Fitzpatrick

Re: Hillary Rodham Clinton

#102

Post by Orlylicious » Tue Mar 13, 2018 5:50 pm

I love, respect and admire Hillary Clinton. It was mostly a vacation for Hillary, she saw a lot of cool sites, this article has an interesting rundown. http://indianexpress.com/article/india/ ... e-5096252/

Delighted she continues to speak her mind and use her experience and voice. There are many districts that will benefit from HRC visiting and dates are being scheduled. HRC won districts that represent 2/3 of America's GDP (as well as the popular vote). All the Republican spin is ridiculous.

Greg Sargent ‏Verified account @ThePlumLineGS
10h 10 hours ago

Here's the sleight of hand smart people are using to misrepresent Hillary quote.

They are claiming a quote about Trump's racist *campaign* was actually a quote about Trump's *supporters.*

Every one of you knows perfectly well that this claim about Trump's campaign is 100% true.




Here's the full address in India, as always her comments are spot on and she would have been a great president.



Photo: In honor of Lt Root Beer! Support the 699th: https://www.facebook.com/Imperial-Illum ... 259897297/
Don't miss The Fogbow's Favorite TV Show starring the titular Mama June Shannon -- "Mama June: From Not To Hot!"

User avatar
p0rtia
Posts: 2860
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2012 11:44 am

Re: Hillary Rodham Clinton

#103

Post by p0rtia » Tue Mar 13, 2018 6:05 pm

TollandRCR wrote:
Tue Mar 13, 2018 4:35 pm
I think that I am being Democratic (not Trumpian) in asking that Hillary Clinton stand down. She can do harm to our chances for recovery.

I opposed her nomination in 2016 but had no better candidate to offer. That is what happens when a nomination is seen as inevitable.
This is the point of disagreement, I do believe. IMO, it is not Hills who might do harm you fear; it is the right-wing propagandists and the media idiots who will filter all she is and has done into one tiny dog-whistle and then blow it loudly who do the harm. If they don't have Hills, they will have Pelosi; if they don't have Pelosi, they will designate someone else. A liberal woman. In fact they are already grooming Kirsten Gillibrand for the role.

Sexism + fear-mongering + intellectually dishonest presentation = voter manipulation. The individuals and their relative strengths and weaknesses when compared to the utter ghouls on the right are irrelevant.
No matter where you go, there you are! :towel:
ImageImageImage

User avatar
TollandRCR
Posts: 20731
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 11:17 pm
Location: RIP, my friend. - Foggy

Re: Hillary Rodham Clinton

#104

Post by TollandRCR » Tue Mar 13, 2018 8:02 pm

Hillary got my vote, my hopes, and my fears. it was the fears that remained and that have been fully activated by Trump.
“The truth is, we know so little about life, we don’t really know what the good news is and what the bad news is.” Kurt Vonnegut

User avatar
kate520
Posts: 15699
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 3:02 pm
Location: Dark side of the Moon
Occupation: servant of cats, chicken wrangler
Contact:

Re: Hillary Rodham Clinton

#105

Post by kate520 » Tue Mar 13, 2018 8:12 pm

Hillary, herself, never had my fears. As P0rtia pointed out, it’s the irrational haters who invented Killary to terrify the evangelicals. Strong woman...BOO...scares them.

I’d like BILL to go away. I’d like Hills to stick around to encourage and inspire the next generation of strong women.... BOO
DEFEND DEMOCRACY

User avatar
neeneko
Posts: 1694
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2017 9:08 am

Re: Hillary Rodham Clinton

#106

Post by neeneko » Tue Mar 13, 2018 8:14 pm

p0rtia wrote:
Tue Mar 13, 2018 6:05 pm
This is the point of disagreement, I do believe. IMO, it is not Hills who might do harm you fear; it is the right-wing propagandists and the media idiots who will filter all she is and has done into one tiny dog-whistle and then blow it loudly who do the harm. If they don't have Hills, they will have Pelosi; if they don't have Pelosi, they will designate someone else. A liberal woman. In fact they are already grooming Kirsten Gillibrand for the role.
One of my recurring complaints about the democratic leadership is they care too much about what the right thinks of them. As you point out, if they are not painting HRC this way, they will just move it to the next target. No candidate that democrats can float will make them happy, even if they were ultra-conservative they would still be a democrat, so wrong team.

The question of her involvement should be one of how well she can energize democrats across a wide age range... which is why I would love to see her in a support role of backing people and being involved, but not as a POTUS candidate or central party leader. But targeting her at the democratic demographics that respond well to her, and using other speakers on demographics that do not, could get some impressive utility out of her yet.

User avatar
TollandRCR
Posts: 20731
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 11:17 pm
Location: RIP, my friend. - Foggy

Re: Hillary Rodham Clinton

#107

Post by TollandRCR » Tue Mar 13, 2018 8:19 pm

My fear was that Hillary would be defeated. I did not anticipate how she would be defeated. That is another instance of an argument for getting rid of the electoral college. However, I never thought that she would be a good candidate.
“The truth is, we know so little about life, we don’t really know what the good news is and what the bad news is.” Kurt Vonnegut

User avatar
TollandRCR
Posts: 20731
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 11:17 pm
Location: RIP, my friend. - Foggy

Re: Hillary Rodham Clinton

#108

Post by TollandRCR » Wed Mar 14, 2018 4:10 am

Some Democratic politicians are unhappy with what Hillary said in India. See Scherer, "Democrats distance themselves ..." in the WAshington Post. Republicans have latched onto it for the midterm elections and encourage Hillary to give speeches all over the world.

i see two lessons here:

Distances no longer matter. If it works as journalism media will cover it no matter where it was said.

Politicians always have to ask themselves this before they say something: Will this help?. The struggle to take back the House is not the time to be self-indulgent. Part of what Hillary said was in response to a question. A better answer would have been "I am focused on the future. I will leave a response to your question to analysts and political scientists.
“The truth is, we know so little about life, we don’t really know what the good news is and what the bad news is.” Kurt Vonnegut

User avatar
neeneko
Posts: 1694
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2017 9:08 am

Re: Hillary Rodham Clinton

#109

Post by neeneko » Wed Mar 14, 2018 6:29 am

TollandRCR wrote:
Wed Mar 14, 2018 4:10 am
Some Democratic politicians are unhappy with what Hillary said in India. See Scherer, "Democrats distance themselves ..." in the WAshington Post. Republicans have latched onto it for the midterm elections and encourage Hillary to give speeches all over the world.

i see two lessons here:
I see a different lesson here. Democrats suck at protecting their own. While I might loath the GoP prioritization of loyalty, the unity and mutual defense it produces results in a strong unified front. Democrats are way to eager to throw each other under the bus whenever their enemies say something mean about them.

User avatar
pipistrelle
Posts: 7058
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 11:26 am

Re: Hillary Rodham Clinton

#110

Post by pipistrelle » Wed Mar 14, 2018 6:34 am

If a voter didn't vote for Conor Lamb based on a word Clinton uttered in India, that voter was never going to vote for Conor Lamb.

User avatar
RVInit
Posts: 8252
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2016 4:31 pm

Re: Hillary Rodham Clinton

#111

Post by RVInit » Wed Mar 14, 2018 9:54 am

pipistrelle wrote:
Wed Mar 14, 2018 6:34 am
If a voter didn't vote for Conor Lamb based on a word Clinton uttered in India, that voter was never going to vote for Conor Lamb.
:like:
"I know that human being and fish can coexist peacefully"
--- George W Bush

ImageImage

User avatar
Till Eulenspiegel
Posts: 406
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2018 9:55 am
Location: France
Occupation: Lawyer (retired )

Re: Hillary Rodham Clinton

#112

Post by Till Eulenspiegel » Tue May 08, 2018 11:51 am

No longer hijacking and introducing an other Russian bot:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... -says.html


"EXCLUSIVE: Bill and Hillary Clinton have 'AT LEAST a one-way open marriage' claims their veteran pollster - who compares them to Kevin Spacey and Robin Wright in House of Cards

Mark Penn served as a pollster for Bill Clinton in the 1990s and chief strategist for Hillary's 2008 presidential campaign
He claims that the former First Couple have 'at least a one-way open marriage'
He even references Kevin Spacey and Robin Wright's characters on the hit political drama House of Cards, where the first couple 'have numerous partners
Penn opens up about the Clintons in his upcoming book, Microtrends Squared: The New Small Forces Driving Today's Big Disruptions
He also criticized Hillary Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign, saying 'elite' and 'highly educated' voters often asked him why Hillary Clinton was so unlikable
Penn says two-thirds of Americans hate her and two-thirds hate Donald Trump
And he pours cold water on claims Russia hacked the election through Facebook which Hillary has listed as one of the reasons she lost."
„Er aber, sag’s ihm, er kann mich im Arsche lecken!“ - J.W. Goethe - Götz von Berlichingen

User avatar
RoadScholar
Posts: 8141
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 10:25 am
Location: Baltimore
Occupation: Historic Restoration Woodworker
Contact:

Re: Hillary Rodham Clinton

#113

Post by RoadScholar » Tue May 08, 2018 11:53 am

Utter and complete bullshit.
The bitterest truth is healthier than the sweetest lie.
X3

User avatar
Till Eulenspiegel
Posts: 406
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2018 9:55 am
Location: France
Occupation: Lawyer (retired )

Re: Hillary Rodham Clinton

#114

Post by Till Eulenspiegel » Tue May 08, 2018 11:56 am

RoadScholar wrote:
Tue May 08, 2018 11:53 am
Utter and complete bullshit.
From a man who was very close to the Clintons.
„Er aber, sag’s ihm, er kann mich im Arsche lecken!“ - J.W. Goethe - Götz von Berlichingen

User avatar
Suranis
Posts: 16971
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 7:04 am

Re: Hillary Rodham Clinton

#115

Post by Suranis » Tue May 08, 2018 12:02 pm

Carl von Ossietsky wrote:
Tue May 08, 2018 11:56 am
From a man who was very close to the Clintons.
... and who was then fired for incompetence, and who is now peddling complete and utter horseshit.

Hey, shock, Bill Clinton had affairs. No wai. Shock, the Clintons sorted out their marriage problems. If all you have is "vote Republican because Bill Clinton had affairs but not as many as the The Toad. Also Hillary Clinton *micdrop*" then you have nothing.
Learn to Swear in Latin. Profanity with class!
https://blogs.transparent.com/latin/lat ... -in-latin/

User avatar
RoadScholar
Posts: 8141
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 10:25 am
Location: Baltimore
Occupation: Historic Restoration Woodworker
Contact:

Re: Hillary Rodham Clinton

#116

Post by RoadScholar » Tue May 08, 2018 12:03 pm

And I guarantee you 2/3 of Americans do not hate Hillary. She won the popular vote by 3 million, even under the weight of the fake news from the Kremlin.
The bitterest truth is healthier than the sweetest lie.
X3

User avatar
kate520
Posts: 15699
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 3:02 pm
Location: Dark side of the Moon
Occupation: servant of cats, chicken wrangler
Contact:

Re: Hillary Rodham Clinton

#117

Post by kate520 » Tue May 08, 2018 12:04 pm

Mark Penn? You are trotting out Mark Penn as some kind of authority? :rotflmao: :rotflmao:

Let me tell ya, 3/4 of all Democrats hate Mark Penn!
DEFEND DEMOCRACY

User avatar
Till Eulenspiegel
Posts: 406
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2018 9:55 am
Location: France
Occupation: Lawyer (retired )

Re: Hillary Rodham Clinton

#118

Post by Till Eulenspiegel » Tue May 08, 2018 12:04 pm

RoadScholar wrote:
Tue May 08, 2018 11:57 am
Horseshit. From the Daily Mail? Are you kidding?

Eat shit and die, asshole. I have fucking had it with your garbage.
Can I have Freedom Fries with the shit, please!
„Er aber, sag’s ihm, er kann mich im Arsche lecken!“ - J.W. Goethe - Götz von Berlichingen

User avatar
Till Eulenspiegel
Posts: 406
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2018 9:55 am
Location: France
Occupation: Lawyer (retired )

Re: Hillary Rodham Clinton

#119

Post by Till Eulenspiegel » Tue May 08, 2018 12:12 pm

Penn was HC's lead pollster - her surrogate - in 2012. Do you want to change history ? If someone knows the Clintons it's him. The Daily Mail is only the messenger.

Ps: I always found Penn horrible. The Clintons chose him and not me.

Corrected

I misspoke. He was HC surrogate in 2008 in HC vs Obama.
„Er aber, sag’s ihm, er kann mich im Arsche lecken!“ - J.W. Goethe - Götz von Berlichingen

User avatar
AndyinPA
Posts: 3215
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2017 1:00 pm
Location: Pittsburgh PA

Re: Hillary Rodham Clinton

#120

Post by AndyinPA » Tue May 08, 2018 12:18 pm

Carl von Ossietsky wrote:
Tue May 08, 2018 12:04 pm
RoadScholar wrote:
Tue May 08, 2018 11:57 am
Horseshit. From the Daily Mail? Are you kidding?

Eat shit and die, asshole. I have fucking had it with your garbage.
Can I have Freedom Fries with the shit, please!
:yeah:

User avatar
Suranis
Posts: 16971
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 7:04 am

Re: Hillary Rodham Clinton

#121

Post by Suranis » Tue May 08, 2018 12:19 pm

Carl von Ossietsky wrote:
Tue May 08, 2018 12:12 pm
Penn was HC's lead pollster - her surrogate - in 2012. Do you want to change history ? If someone knows the Clintons it's him. The Daily Mail is only the messenger.

Ps: I always found Penn horrible. The Clintons chose him and not me.
Oh lead pollster in 2012, eh? Well based on his expert analysis Hillary won everything she ran for in 2012, didn't she? Ass.

Anyway, in more "Penn is full of the most liquid shit imaginable" news here is stuff from 2017 (posting full article becasue why not its from 9 months ago)
Why is a former Clinton pollster writing iffy poll analysis that panders to Trump supporters?
by Philip Bump October 12, 2017


The document for which Mark Penn will be remembered in books documenting the nation’s political history is a memo he wrote for Hillary Clinton’s 2008 presidential primary campaign. That memo argued that Clinton — for whom he was an adviser — should focus on blue-collar voters and women, taking pains to note that, unlike Barack Obama, she was born in the middle of the United States.

“Let’s explicitly own ‘American’ in our programs, the speeches and the values,” Penn suggested, saying that Obama’s diverse, multicultural background should be saved “for 2050,” when the nation itself was more pluralistic. “Let’s use our logo to make some flags we can give out. Let’s add flag symbols to the backgrounds.”

Obama was unelectable in a general, Penn argued, except “perhaps against Atila [sic] the Hun.”

That turns out to have been wrong.

If that memo didn’t exist, Penn’s essay at the Hill published on Thursday might be considered one of his more problematic pieces of analysis.

We can’t fault Penn too much for the headline — “Why the polls are still wrong” — as it’s rarely the contributor’s choice what the headline will be. But it’s remarkable that Penn didn’t ask that the headline be changed, given that his entire point is that polls show President Trump with more support than he’s given credit for, albeit in the form of support for his stated policies. A dozen polls are cited in service to an article summarized as “the polls are still wrong.”

Regardless, we can certainly fault him for his arguments.

It’s true both that Trump is broadly unpopular (as measured by multiple opinion polls) and that there are positions he espouses that are popular. We will cede that since, well, it’s sort of obvious. We will also cede the point that Republicans broadly think Trump is doing a good job, something that has been noted any number of times by The Washington Post and others.

As Penn makes that point, though, he goes out of his way to include weird cultural touchstones that seem clearly intended to appeal to that Trump base.

For example, this is how Penn dismisses polling that shows Trump as unpopular:

The methodology of some of these polls is to poll “all adults” without any qualification as to citizenship or voting intent. A lot of the nonvoters dislike politics and all politicians, and these polls also include them along with undocumented immigrants who are not screened out.

There are two implications here. The first is that somehow people who don’t vote don’t get to have an opinion on the president. The second is that the number of people who reject the president is swollen by undocumented immigrants. At most, undocumented immigrants represent 3 percent of the population, a group that’s less likely to speak English and almost certainly not registered to vote. To suggest that they make up a significant portion of the responses to a poll is disingenuous.

“The president gets 65 percent approval for hurricane response and 53 percent approval for the economy and fighting terrorism,” Penn writes as he fleshes out “a more complex picture” of opinions on Trump. “He gets his lowest marks for the way he is administering the government. And he is a divider when people want a uniter.”

This is deliberately playing down how low Trump’s numbers are.

Trump’s hurricane response — measured before his response to Puerto Rico — is one of the few bright spots for him. Different polls show a broad range of opinion on the economy, although he usually does decently on it. (In The Post’s most recent poll, more people view him unfavorably than favorably on this metric.) Penn leaves out a host of other issues where Trump consistently fares poorly, including immigration and health care. He doesn’t mention a number of personal characteristics, on which Trump is generally viewed negatively. It’s cherry-picking.

Then there’s this paragraph, which follows one about Kim Jong Un.

Iran’s national anthem is “Death to America,” and no one is taking a knee to that one over there. The regime once held our embassy hostage, and 70 percent of America believes it will cheat on the nuclear arms deal. So senators who attack Trump for being too tough on these known despots and killers may get a lot of coverage but are swimming upstream, giving indirect comfort to our fiercest enemies.

What on Earth is that? The “take a knee” thing is an out-of-the-blue shot meant to question the patriotism of those NFL players participating in protests during the national anthem. But then Penn implies that majority belief that Iran will cheat on the nuclear deal will mean a political cost for senators “who attack Trump for being too tough on these known despots and killers.”

First of all, it’s not clear how that out-of-context data point applies to assessments of Trump’s “toughness.” The poll result suggests that people would support Trump, say, taking steps to make sure Iran doesn’t cheat on the deal, but not much more than that.

Second: Who are these so-called senators? What senator has said, “Trump is being too tough on Iran and Kim”? None, of course. Many have criticized Trump’s handling of those two foreign policy issues for a variety of reasons, but I challenge you to find an example of a senator asking Trump to take it easy on them. It’s a straw man meant to make Trump’s position seem both more sound and more defensible.

Penn insists that Obama was popular while his policies weren’t while the opposite is true for Trump. To make this point, he deliberately reframes Trump’s policies, suggesting that Americans want more border security. Sure. Trump’s go-to answer for that is to build a wall — which is a deeply unpopular proposal.

More important, Penn ignores the core issue at play: partisanship.

Republicans opposed Obama and his policies fervently and Democrats supported them, leading to mixed opinions. The reverse happened with Trump, including actual partisan flips on some of the same policies. Penn’s response to Trump’s polling? We need to pay more attention to that strong Republican support.

In some cases, Trump’s positions are more popular because he took the position, as with the NFL protests. That’s his base reading his pulse, not necessarily him reading the pulse of the nation.

Why did Penn write his piece? It’s not clear, but the undercurrents are revealing. He is clearly sympathetic to Trump, a guy who ran the campaign that Penn wanted to see from Clinton in 2008. He likes to play the contrarian. And he’s going out of his way to lure Trump supporters to his cause.

If you want to believe that the polls are wrong and Trump is generally popular, feel free. But Penn’s analysis shouldn’t convince you that’s true.
Learn to Swear in Latin. Profanity with class!
https://blogs.transparent.com/latin/lat ... -in-latin/

User avatar
TollandRCR
Posts: 20731
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 11:17 pm
Location: RIP, my friend. - Foggy

Re: Hillary Rodham Clinton

#122

Post by TollandRCR » Tue May 08, 2018 12:44 pm

Mark Penn caused harm to HRC and to the Democratic Party. So did Dick Morris.
“The truth is, we know so little about life, we don’t really know what the good news is and what the bad news is.” Kurt Vonnegut

User avatar
RVInit
Posts: 8252
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2016 4:31 pm

Re: Hillary Rodham Clinton

#123

Post by RVInit » Tue May 08, 2018 12:59 pm

TollandRCR wrote:
Tue May 08, 2018 12:44 pm
Mark Penn caused harm to HRC and to the Democratic Party. So did Dick Morris.
Democratic voters also are much harder on their candidates and politicians than Republican voters. Just look at the gymnastics and backflips being done by evangelicals to justify their support of Trump. I know recently someone posted actual data that supported the fact that Democratic voters hold their candidates to much higher standards and don't make nearly the excuses for them that Republican voters make for their candidates and politicians.
"I know that human being and fish can coexist peacefully"
--- George W Bush

ImageImage

User avatar
neeneko
Posts: 1694
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2017 9:08 am

Re: Hillary Rodham Clinton

#124

Post by neeneko » Tue May 08, 2018 1:47 pm

RVInit wrote:
Tue May 08, 2018 12:59 pm
Democratic voters also are much harder on their candidates and politicians than Republican voters. Just look at the gymnastics and backflips being done by evangelicals to justify their support of Trump. I know recently someone posted actual data that supported the fact that Democratic voters hold their candidates to much higher standards and don't make nearly the excuses for them that Republican voters make for their candidates and politicians.
I am not really sure it is really 'higher standards'. Progressive voters tend to suck at coalition building and alliances, always willing to sell out each other's groups if they think their particular variant might get some advantage out of it over other sects. They are usually willing to give strong support to candidates closely aligned with them, but the willingness to support further ones drops off quickly so the net of general mutual support tends to be a lot weaker than conservatives have.

User avatar
Till Eulenspiegel
Posts: 406
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2018 9:55 am
Location: France
Occupation: Lawyer (retired )

Re: Hillary Rodham Clinton

#125

Post by Till Eulenspiegel » Tue May 08, 2018 2:16 pm

RVInit wrote:
Tue May 08, 2018 12:59 pm


Democratic voters also are much harder on their candidates and politicians than Republican voters. Just look at the gymnastics and backflips being done by evangelicals to justify their support of Trump. I know recently someone posted actual data that supported the fact that Democratic voters hold their candidates to much higher standards and don't make nearly the excuses for them that Republican voters make for their candidates and politicians.
For me that is a very important reason why Dems are preferable to Repubs.
„Er aber, sag’s ihm, er kann mich im Arsche lecken!“ - J.W. Goethe - Götz von Berlichingen

Post Reply

Return to “General Politics”