Hillary Clinton is Done

Status
Not open for further replies.
Gawdzilla Sama said:
You should never ever vote Democrat. You should vote for the best candidate regardless of their party. Straight-ticket voting is morally and intellectually lazy.
Click to expand...

Yep... personally I cross out any Republican that mentions religion in a way that suggests a particular religion has special status. That would be all of them that I've ever heard speak a single word.
 
fuelair said:
Hillary Clinton is Done




Naaaaaahhh!!! She's still rising!!!!!
































While republicker doughnuts are walking around playing circular firing squad...............
Click to expand...
It is my fervent hope that she does not get the nomination.

I don't think she can win. I believe a Hillary nomination will mean a Republican White House, which I do not look forward to.
 
barehl said:
My prediction. It won't have any effect on her campaign and there were will be at least one more "campaign ending pseudo-scandal" before January. How desperate do you have to be to ask Romney for commentary? I guess only slightly less desperate than if you had to ask Newt.
Click to expand...

Or an actual newt - which is at least smarter.
 
bruto said:
Too busy to type those extra two letters? Too important? Cut the baloney. It is done on purpose with the intent of saying a name wrong for no good reason. It is beneath the dignity of anyone who wishes to pretend he is arguing actual ideas. There's plenty to argue about without carrying on like a schoolyard brat.
Click to expand...

Kinda like republickers, huh?
 
Francesca R said:
Got any stats about the extent to which folks vote POTUS across party divide?
Click to expand...

It's not the party divide so much as the lack of affiliation. The "swing vote", as it is called, is enough to win any presidential election. Those people vote by whichever party or candidate appeals to them in a particular election.

As recently as 2002, almost 70% of the country self-identified as Republicans or Democrats. Today, that's as low as 56%. The 44% who call themselves independents, though, include large numbers of "leaners". The real figure is probably "most likely to vote Dem/Rep" and that's currently in its historical "off-season" low. There's 14% of the country who identify as having no clear cut choice/loyalty.

But that number changes. If you check the figures, right around November of the even-numbered years (Congressional elections at minimum, plus X ammount of Senators, and naturally Presidential elections every alternate even-numbered years), those "Independents" have temporarily identified as one party or another.... the one they are voting for or intend to vote for. The "Independent" goes from 14 or 15% to 5 or 6. And that may well be 2 to 4% who think it's no damned pollster's business who they voted for.

But there are no testable statistics as to cross-over because party membership is so low and because your vote is secret, of course. The available information comes from exit polls. They factor in the margin for error, but there have been results when the exit poll information did not reflect the outcome in a district or city.
 
In theory I agree, but in practice I agree with a quote attributed to Mark Twain: there may not be anyone to vote for but there's always someone to vote against. In my experience those in the latter category have always been Republicans.
 
Jrrarglblarg said:
In theory I agree, but in practice I agree with a quote attributed to Mark Twain: there may not be anyone to vote for but there's always someone to vote against. In my experience those in the latter category have always been Republicans.
Click to expand...

I'd say "generally have been Republicans", particularly in the last couple of decades. Well, last three decades. Oh, okay, then.... last 35 years. That's my final answer. Wait! Can I phone a friend?

And let us not forget that Twain was a humorist. Like many, he'd sometimes say stuff just for the opportunity to put a zinger in that would appeal to the audience. I think his most famous line (maybe apocryphal, I don't know) was in response to who he was going to vote for in the upcoming election... "Oh, I don't vote. It only encourages them."
 
Francesca R said:
"I vote for the individual, it's just that I always prefer the [my party] individual"

Yeah . . .
Click to expand...

Shall I post the emails I received from the McCain team back in the day? I, raised by a man who spit to clean his mouth out if required to speak Reagan's name, seriously considered McCain as a voting option for a while. Then I got a questionnaire basically trying to figure out which way the weathervane should point and I realized he had no actual policy platform of his own but would adopt whatever position would get him the most votes. And then he got stuck with a dingbat running mate because nobody else in the GOP was stupid enough to want to follow Dubya and clean his mess.

So, go fish.
 
Francesca R said:
There seems to be a disproportionate amount of offence taken by it.

Nothing better than handing your political opponents a button to push.
Click to expand...
It is not the offense that bothers me but the dishonesty of it. If you call Democrats "libtards" or closet communists or whatever, your intention is obvious. Insult is a standard element of political rhetoric. To speak of the "Democrat" party and then pretend that it is not intentional is a plain lie. You can claim ignorance only once.
 
Seems it's the swing voters who decide the elections, , and I just can't see any republicans swinging to Hillary.
 
bruto said:
It is not the offense that bothers me but the dishonesty of it. If you call Democrats "libtards" or closet communists or whatever, your intention is obvious. Insult is a standard element of political rhetoric. To speak of the "Democrat" party and then pretend that it is not intentional is a plain lie. You can claim ignorance only once.
Click to expand...

So, really you want Dems to be called "Democratics".
 
Tony Stark said:
I can't wait for the election. Most Republicans will be in denial of the probability that the American people are going to elect Hillary as their President right up until it actually happens. Then their heads will explode.
Click to expand...
Careful, you're sliding into EG3K territory.

kookbreaker said:
The whole Vince Foster claims do have the look of 'Freshman Effort' don't they?
Click to expand...
Where's BAC when you need him? :)

xjx388 said:
I didn't protest; I pointed it out. I have not seen one poster ever complain about such obvious slurs. But somehow "democrat" is a grievous insult that must be protested and made the subject of signature lines. It's just funny to me is all.
Click to expand...
There's plenty of put-downs on both sides on this board. But out in the Real World I hear "Democrat Party" often from the far right but I've never heard even a hard lefty purposely mangle the Republican Party name. That's the difference.

12AX7 said:
Republicans: If you want my vote, give me a candidate that isn't a flaming hypocrite that panders to the fringe loons. Give me a candidate who's "scandals" are less than some deleted emails and donations from foreign entities. Give me a candidate that isn't trying to "out-Jesus" the other candidates. Give me a candidate that supports equal rights and protections for all citizens, whether they agree with their lifestyles or not. Give me a candidate who's first idea when faced with a foreign policy issue isn't "WAR!".
Click to expand...
For my vote you left out the most important thing: Supreme Court nominations. I'm looking for someone who won't nominate a Bork, a Scalia, or (for gawd's sake) a Miers.
 
Francesca R said:
Erm, why is "democrat party" any insult at all??
Click to expand...

It is not an insult. It is a passive-aggressive taunt. Rush Limbaugh was one of the first to try this type of pettiness. I do not know if he viewed it merely as a silly name or if he really thought he could troll democrats with such crap.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom