Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 2, 2017 20:01:00 GMT -5
Damn it, we need that time machine.
|
|
|
Post by Christine on May 2, 2017 20:30:16 GMT -5
Shaddup Cass, you meanie
*sulks*
*hugs Hillary plush toy*
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 2, 2017 21:01:39 GMT -5
No one ever makes mod plush toys.
*sulks*
|
|
|
Post by Don on May 2, 2017 21:04:09 GMT -5
I doubt there were very many in the rust belt states that tipped for Trump who were all ready to vote for Clinton until the moment Comey released his letter. Those votes seem to have been based on economic promises, not national security issues.
|
|
|
Post by Christine on May 2, 2017 21:43:53 GMT -5
No one ever makes mod plush toys. *sulks* I would buy Baby plush toy in a heartbeat.
|
|
|
Post by Christine on May 2, 2017 21:45:07 GMT -5
I doubt there were very many in the rust belt states that tipped for Trump who were all ready to vote for Clinton until the moment Comey released his letter. Those votes seem to have been based on economic promises, not national security issues. It wasn't a matter of one or the other. It was voting Clinton or staying home.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on May 3, 2017 7:39:25 GMT -5
Here's a transcript of Clinton's interview: www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1705/02/wolf.02.htmlSome more: She's as much in denial as Trump, imo. That, and she's pimping yet another book which millions of sycophants will buy but few will actually read. And as I said above, she says she takes responsibility, but she really, really doesn't. She didn't lose because she made mistakes, she lost--in her mind--because of outside forces, alone.
|
|
|
Post by Don on May 3, 2017 9:02:41 GMT -5
Maybe we should start a chip-in to buy her a nice participation trophy.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on May 4, 2017 8:09:07 GMT -5
FYI, here's Nate Silver's article, The Comey Letter Probably Cost Clinton The Election. It's long, it's full of data, and is--imo--a huge waste of space. I like Silver, I think he's really smart, really good at analysis. But on this, he's trying to identify a single cause for a lost election which most everyone--including him--never had a firm handle on from the get-go. In the piece, he talks about Clinton's lead "cratering" after the Comey letter, yet by November 7th, it was higher than it was at the beginning of October. What he never does is explain the October bump, he just takes it as a given. Here's a question: allowing that Comey never wrote that letter and that Clinton then won the Presidency, would Silver and others be grabbing on to a single negative story about Trump to explain why he lost? I kinda doubt it.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on May 4, 2017 10:20:45 GMT -5
Here's a transcript of Clinton's interview: www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1705/02/wolf.02.htmlSome more: She's as much in denial as Trump, imo. That, and she's pimping yet another book which millions of sycophants will buy but few will actually read. And as I said above, she says she takes responsibility, but she really, really doesn't. She didn't lose because she made mistakes, she lost--in her mind--because of outside forces, alone. So sorry Clinton didn't cry, crumble to the floor and rend her flesh with barbed lashes to put on a show of contrition for you. I'm certain you would have enjoyed that immensely. Every losing campaign goes through a period of reexamination and reassessing what was done wrong and how it could have been done better, and Hillary Clinton's campaign did a lot of things wrong. Happy talk about turning Arizona blue and allocating precious resources there while rationing Ohio, Michigan and Pennsylvania was a major fuck-up. "Make America Great Again" was a better sales pitch than "I'm With Her" because messaging matters. Duh. But it's not being in denial for Clinton to be royally pissed at James Comey for putting his thumb--a Republican thumb, no less---on the scale and introducing into the presidential campaign, a malevolent cloud of malfeasance that never cleared up even though it led to nothing beyond tipping the election. We've never seen a FBI Director do what Comey did to Clinton. She's got good reason to be bitter about that. Your own scorn of All Things Hillary is long and well-established and snide cracks like, " Pimping yet another book which millions of sycophants will buy but few will actually read." This sneering disgust would make you a fine candidate for a Faux News talking heads show, but it has rendered you incapable of offering anything remotely resembling an fair and impartial judgment. FYI, here's Nate Silver's article, The Comey Letter Probably Cost Clinton The Election. It's long, it's full of data, and is--imo--a huge waste of space. I like Silver, I think he's really smart, really good at analysis. But on this, he's trying to identify a single cause for a lost election which most everyone--including him--never had a firm handle on from the get-go. In the piece, he talks about Clinton's lead "cratering" after the Comey letter, yet by November 7th, it was higher than it was at the beginning of October. What he never does is explain the October bump, he just takes it as a given. Here's a question: allowing that Comey never wrote that letter and that Clinton then won the Presidency, would Silver and others be grabbing on to a single negative story about Trump to explain why he lost? I kinda doubt it. I'm amused you think Silver's analysis of the impact of the Comey letter is "a huge waste of space." You're right that the article is pretty long, but then this is a complicated topic requiring a pretty deep dive and that necessitates a certain degree of length to make and support Silver's points. Silver makes a far more convincing case Comey ratfucked Clinton and cost her the election than you do he didn't in your 151 words. Does that qualify as a small waste of space?
|
|
|
Post by celawson on May 4, 2017 10:23:13 GMT -5
Hillary Clinton:
I would posit Trump's barrage of negativity was enormouser. And he still won.
|
|
|
Post by Christine on May 4, 2017 11:23:02 GMT -5
That wasn't negativity. It was pure, unadulterated shock and horror.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on May 4, 2017 12:07:55 GMT -5
Hillary Clinton: I would posit Trump's barrage of negativity was enormouser. And he still won. So you're saying President Pussygrabber was on the receiving end of more negativity than his opponent? I don't recall Hillary calling Trump "Dumb Donald" though he did call her "Crooked Hillary." I don't recall Hillary leading chants of "Lock Him Up!" at her rallies. I don't recall Hillary insinuating Bernie Sanders' father was involved in the Kennedy assassination the way Trump did about Ted Cruz's dad. I don't recall Trump being subjected to a 10hr interrogation by partisan Democrats in a House hearing. I don't recall James Comey sharing with the press and public that Trump allies were under investigation for their Russian ties. I don't recall Clinton muttering under her breath during the debates, "Such a nasty man" the way Trump did about her. I don't recall anyone giving Clinton a Nazi-style salute. I don't recall Clinton talk about building a stupid wall or calling Mexicans "rapists" or calling any story she disliked "fake news" or demeaning a Gold Star family or acting like a raging, fat fascist douche who likes grabbing women by their vaginas. I don't recall any of that vile shit coming from Hillary Clinton. All of that and more came from Donald Trump, and the fact none of that bothers you says more about Trump and his supporters than it does about Clinton and hers.
|
|
|
Post by celawson on May 4, 2017 13:26:54 GMT -5
Hillary Clinton: I would posit Trump's barrage of negativity was enormouser. And he still won. So you're saying President Pussygrabber was on the receiving end of more negativity than his opponent? I don't recall Hillary calling Trump "Dumb Donald" though he did call her "Crooked Hillary." I don't recall Hillary leading chants of "Lock Him Up!" at her rallies. I don't recall Hillary insinuating Bernie Sanders' father was involved in the Kennedy assassination the way Trump did about Ted Cruz's dad. I don't recall Trump being subjected to a 10hr interrogation by partisan Democrats in a House hearing. I don't recall James Comey sharing with the press and public that Trump allies were under investigation for their Russian ties. I don't recall Clinton muttering under her breath during the debates, "Such a nasty man" the way Trump did about her. I don't recall anyone giving Clinton a Nazi-style salute. I don't recall Clinton talk about building a stupid wall or calling Mexicans "rapists" or calling any story she disliked "fake news" or demeaning a Gold Star family or acting like a raging, fat fascist douche who likes grabbing women by their vaginas. I don't recall any of that vile shit coming from Hillary Clinton. All of that and more came from Donald Trump, and the fact none of that bothers you says more about Trump and his supporters than it does about Clinton and hers. Hmmm, Clinton gave her fair share. She just prefers the word "deplorable" to "nasty". I don't like that stuff, either, ohio. All I'm saying is that, as Christine alluded to just before your post, Trump received more negativity, and still does, than Clinton ever has from the media and the public. I admit much to most of it he has brought on himself. Yet he still won. So I do think Clinton needs to stop blaming external forces as much as she is doing, and perhaps be a bit more introspective about why she lost.
|
|
|
Post by Christine on May 4, 2017 13:45:29 GMT -5
No actually I was alluding to shock and horror. Actual, experiential shock and horror.
|
|