Handyman
Hug someone you care about...
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVII: If debates are great theater, I think this one closes e
Krugman Is Not Happy
Krugman Is Not Happy
USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
Campaign 2016 Part XVII: If debates are great theater, I think this one closes early
- Thread starter joecct
- Start date
- Status
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVII: If debates are great theater, I think this one closes e
Agreed. She is a machine and a pure politician. One cannot deny that (and that isn't necessarily an insult).
Agreed. She is a machine and a pure politician. One cannot deny that (and that isn't necessarily an insult).
Slap Shot
I got nothing
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVII: If debates are great theater, I think this one closes e
I don't care for Hillary at all. She just rubs me the wrong way. However, Hillary is infinitely more qualified than Trump to be President and it's not even close and I'm not sure there are many out there that could match that as of today. The only reason Trump is even sniffing a win is because Hillary has so much baggage - real and manufactured. There is no evidence that anyone else the GOP ran to the podium would fare any better.
I don't care for Hillary at all. She just rubs me the wrong way. However, Hillary is infinitely more qualified than Trump to be President and it's not even close and I'm not sure there are many out there that could match that as of today. The only reason Trump is even sniffing a win is because Hillary has so much baggage - real and manufactured. There is no evidence that anyone else the GOP ran to the podium would fare any better.
Last edited:
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVII: If debates are great theater, I think this one closes e
Dumb analysis on several levels. I put it to you that Hillary is possibly the only Democrat with the ability to take down Trump. What mistakes do losing Democrats tend to make (Gore, Kerry, etc)? The mistake they make is trusting the media too much to tell the truth. That's why Kerry wouldn't answer the swift boat slander, or Gore that he invented the internet or anything Dukakis let go unanswered. Then they have a deer in the headlights look about them when the charges stick no matter how ridiculous (really, in Kerry's case the entire armed forces would have to have been in on the conspiracy for him to fake his war record).
It would be nice to think Elizabeth Warren or some other White Knight could swoop down and 1) run a national campaign, and 2) deflect the unprecedented nonsense coming out of Trump. But, as much as I like her, Warren's never been tested on this level. Bernie Sanders would have gotten eaten alive. You can't expect your virtue to just shine through during a mudslinging campaign. Hillary knows all this. She's dealt with it before and in an uncommon election as we've ever had, you need someone who's seen it all.
Next, your "she took August off" meme is stark raving stupid. Elections aren't decided in August. Put her aside for a moment and think of her campaign. They aren't chasing the media cycle. They aren't trying to shout louder than Trump. What they're doing is laying the groundwork for the things that win elections. That starts with raising money to fund a campaign apparatus to not only bring out swing state voters, but to set up shop in places like Arizona and Georgia. She most likely won't win those, but it forces Trump to defend them.
The hallmark of pundidiotry is to sniff that candidate so and so would be President if the rubes would have only chosen them in the primaries. Like the voters and the Beltway chattering class think exactly alike.
John Kasich won exactly 1 state, his own, in the primaries. Yet he would have been a lock for the WH? Okaayyyyy...
Bottom line is there will be no more LBJ-Nixon-Reagan type re-election landslides anymore. Country is too polarized and old people have found their patron saint in Trump. He'll get his 42-45% of the vote depending on how much Johnson takes from him. But, a victory somewhere between 2012 and 2008 nets the Senate with a few seats to spare and about 20 House seats. A 2008 type victory might net the House. That's reality, not some la-la fantasyland view of the country.
I would purport that the majority of that bleeding has been to Johnson and Stein, not Drumpf, and that a lot of those voters can still be won back. Not sure what the poll trends say about that theory, I'm too lazy to check.
If the D's had offered up almost any other candidate (and no, Bernie was not a Democrat), I think this would already be set for a landslide. As it is, the Rovers of the board (Clinton sycophants) will have to settle for an Obama 2012 or likely a bit worse. Which will be immensely disturbing, because it won't be the kind of blowout needed for the R's to completely repudiate the dogma they've embraced in the last 50 years.
For all my "Shrill" criticism, I was giving her the benefit of the doubt until the past 3-4 weeks, when she disappeared from the radar, in true Clinton "We don't have to answer to the media, or you proletarian peons" fashion. And now, in the last week, she's claiming, "Oh, sorry, I forgot about my training regarding classified info, because, uhh, you know I had that concussion..." Jesus that sounds awful, regardless if it's true or not. And worse yet, she appeared for the press, seemingly after Drumpf demanded it. Yuck.
Dumb analysis on several levels. I put it to you that Hillary is possibly the only Democrat with the ability to take down Trump. What mistakes do losing Democrats tend to make (Gore, Kerry, etc)? The mistake they make is trusting the media too much to tell the truth. That's why Kerry wouldn't answer the swift boat slander, or Gore that he invented the internet or anything Dukakis let go unanswered. Then they have a deer in the headlights look about them when the charges stick no matter how ridiculous (really, in Kerry's case the entire armed forces would have to have been in on the conspiracy for him to fake his war record).
It would be nice to think Elizabeth Warren or some other White Knight could swoop down and 1) run a national campaign, and 2) deflect the unprecedented nonsense coming out of Trump. But, as much as I like her, Warren's never been tested on this level. Bernie Sanders would have gotten eaten alive. You can't expect your virtue to just shine through during a mudslinging campaign. Hillary knows all this. She's dealt with it before and in an uncommon election as we've ever had, you need someone who's seen it all.
Next, your "she took August off" meme is stark raving stupid. Elections aren't decided in August. Put her aside for a moment and think of her campaign. They aren't chasing the media cycle. They aren't trying to shout louder than Trump. What they're doing is laying the groundwork for the things that win elections. That starts with raising money to fund a campaign apparatus to not only bring out swing state voters, but to set up shop in places like Arizona and Georgia. She most likely won't win those, but it forces Trump to defend them.
The hallmark of pundidiotry is to sniff that candidate so and so would be President if the rubes would have only chosen them in the primaries. Like the voters and the Beltway chattering class think exactly alike.
John Kasich won exactly 1 state, his own, in the primaries. Yet he would have been a lock for the WH? Okaayyyyy...Bottom line is there will be no more LBJ-Nixon-Reagan type re-election landslides anymore. Country is too polarized and old people have found their patron saint in Trump. He'll get his 42-45% of the vote depending on how much Johnson takes from him. But, a victory somewhere between 2012 and 2008 nets the Senate with a few seats to spare and about 20 House seats. A 2008 type victory might net the House. That's reality, not some la-la fantasyland view of the country.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVII: If debates are great theater, I think this one closes e
It is good. Sick jokes beat good form if they work.
It is good. Sick jokes beat good form if they work.
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVII: If debates are great theater, I think this one closes e
Exactly. I remember reading a book on T. Roosevelt and the election of 1900. Republican party operatives were unhappy with his progressive agenda as Governor of NY, so they conspired to get him nominated for the vice-presidency, correctly analyzing it as the one political job where you can have zero influence. There was one, lone voice in the wilderness (I don't recall his name) who stated, "Don't you realize we are putting him just one madman away from the Presidency!?" One crazy Pole later and he was right.Well when I looked over the weekend the numbers when all 4 were in the poll had Hillary farther ahead then just head to head with Drumpf. (she was ahead both ways though) Johnson just pulls too much away from Drumpf and Stein has no pull really from Hillary.
The best part of the stupid "Hillary is Ill" meme is that if she was ill, and unable to hold office whoever they replace her with on the ballot (assuming she is unfit now) will likely wipe the floor with Drumpf and win in a landslide. Whether it is Kaine jumping up or Biden swooping in (and he would) Drumpf would go down in flames. The Frauddy's of the world should be praying she is as healthy as Drumpf brags to be
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVII: If debates are great theater, I think this one closes e
Well, then it MUST be true!
Good assessment of the race here...
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/can-trump-remake-electorate-n643631
Well, then it MUST be true!
Good assessment of the race here...
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/can-trump-remake-electorate-n643631
Last edited:
Well, then it MUST be true!
They were quoting Politico.
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVII: If debates are great theater, I think this one closes e
I agree. I would have preferred Bernie, but Clinton has loads of experience, a savvy counselor within arm's length, toughness, intelligence, and a party platform that is not as liberal as I'd like but an easy choice over Trump's platform.
Of course, people who still allow themselves to be steered by the 25-year Whitewatergate, Fostergate, Travelgate, BENGHAZI!!! EMAILS!!!, LIAR!!! campaign sponsored Ailes, Murdoch, Limbaugh et al. will convince themselves of this false equivalency. From what I can see, her detractors rarely take the time to criticize of her policy positions, though I'm sure there is plenty to criticize.
I agree. I would have preferred Bernie, but Clinton has loads of experience, a savvy counselor within arm's length, toughness, intelligence, and a party platform that is not as liberal as I'd like but an easy choice over Trump's platform.
Of course, people who still allow themselves to be steered by the 25-year Whitewatergate, Fostergate, Travelgate, BENGHAZI!!! EMAILS!!!, LIAR!!! campaign sponsored Ailes, Murdoch, Limbaugh et al. will convince themselves of this false equivalency. From what I can see, her detractors rarely take the time to criticize of her policy positions, though I'm sure there is plenty to criticize.
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVII: If debates are great theater, I think this one closes e
Well, then it MUST be true! Can't beat Tiger Beat on the Potomac for hard hitting news. 
Well, then it MUST be true!
Can't beat Tiger Beat on the Potomac for hard hitting news.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVII: If debates are great theater, I think this one closes e
Gonna call BS on the report -- it's Corporate 101 you never, ever allow even the hint of a suggestion of this. And for that matter do you have any idea how much the rich rake in under Trump's tax plan? It gives Pete Peterson a hard-on just thinking about it.
Now, it could be that Goldman itself will only donate to one candidate, but I doubt it -- at that level you bribe both sides so either way you win.
Gonna call BS on the report -- it's Corporate 101 you never, ever allow even the hint of a suggestion of this. And for that matter do you have any idea how much the rich rake in under Trump's tax plan? It gives Pete Peterson a hard-on just thinking about it.
Now, it could be that Goldman itself will only donate to one candidate, but I doubt it -- at that level you bribe both sides so either way you win.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVII: If debates are great theater, I think this one closes e
From this name Leon Czolgosz might have descended from Silesians, which are perpetually being tugged at by Poles, Czechs and Slovaks. He might well have been a crazy Slovak (many spoke Polish), though more likely he thought of himself as a crazy Austro-Hungarian.
From this name Leon Czolgosz might have descended from Silesians, which are perpetually being tugged at by Poles, Czechs and Slovaks. He might well have been a crazy Slovak (many spoke Polish), though more likely he thought of himself as a crazy Austro-Hungarian.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVII: If debates are great theater, I think this one closes e
Oh boy. "Developing story," as they say at Fox.
Looks like nobody leaves FNC anymore unless they're heading to the courthouse with their attorney. Couldn't happen to a nicer band of thieves and thugs. May they all sue one another into penury.
Presumably it has nothing whatsoever to do with this.
Oh boy. "Developing story," as they say at Fox.
Looks like nobody leaves FNC anymore unless they're heading to the courthouse with their attorney. Couldn't happen to a nicer band of thieves and thugs. May they all sue one another into penury.
Presumably it has nothing whatsoever to do with this.
The Sicatoka
Kicizapi Cetan
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVII: If debates are great theater, I think this one closes e
Precedent, sort of.
Precedent, sort of.
The Sicatoka
Kicizapi Cetan
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVII: If debates are great theater, I think this one closes e
< ding >
Correct.
< ding >
Correct.
French Rage
NICKERSON HAS [CENSORED]
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVII: If debates are great theater, I think this one closes e
I wish the media did a better job of covering of the presidential candidates using their namesake charitable foundation for ethical sketchy purposes.
You know, like this: http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slat...medium=website&utm_content=link&ICID=ref_fark
I wish the media did a better job of covering of the presidential candidates using their namesake charitable foundation for ethical sketchy purposes.
You know, like this: http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slat...medium=website&utm_content=link&ICID=ref_fark
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVII: If debates are great theater, I think this one closes e
While this story has been around for awhile, its no surprise the Clinton team is making the media cover it now after Labor Day and in the weeks before the 1st debate. Anybody asking Clinton for favors after donating to the foundation got refused. Trump paid the Florida AG 25K to her campaign and with weeks she declined to join a lawsuit against his sham university. Then he held a fundraiser for her. There's no running away from this one.
While this story has been around for awhile, its no surprise the Clinton team is making the media cover it now after Labor Day and in the weeks before the 1st debate. Anybody asking Clinton for favors after donating to the foundation got refused. Trump paid the Florida AG 25K to her campaign and with weeks she declined to join a lawsuit against his sham university. Then he held a fundraiser for her. There's no running away from this one.
- Status