Hillary Clinton is Done

Status
Not open for further replies.
Loss Leader said:
I should ask Obama if his former Secretary of State is racist? That sounds ... unproductive.
Click to expand...

Yeah, he probably would not tell you what he really feels. So just ask him about the election, like I said.

He was quite unhappy with Sid Blumenthal, the Clinton dirty tricks specialist, though, wasn't he?
 
wareyin said:
The opening post was about a debunked right wing claim, and the subsequent posts were pointing out the fallibility of the source. I repeat, what is the relevance of your dubious claim?
Click to expand...
I suspect that the relevance here is that the broader the thread becomes, and the less limited to its titled subject, the easier it will be to deny error if Clinton succeeds. Just guessing.
 
bruto said:
I suspect that the relevance here is that the broader the thread becomes, and the less limited to its titled subject, the easier it will be to deny error if Clinton succeeds. Just guessing.
Click to expand...
It seems to me that it's more like: the broader the thread becomes, the less limited to its titled subject, the easier it is to throw stuff at the wall and hope something sticks. Having read the link, that weak stuff isn't going to stick.
 
16.5 said:
Yeah, he probably would not tell you what he really feels. So just ask him about the election, like I said.

He was quite unhappy with Sid Blumenthal, the Clinton dirty tricks specialist, though, wasn't he?
Click to expand...
Not unhappy enough to keep him from appointing Hillary Clinton his Secretary of State.

Honestly, if you had a single piece of additional evidence, you'd have one piece of evidence.
 
16.5 said:
the fact that she is a hypocritical racist will certainly come back and contribute to her inevitable downfall.
Click to expand...

Would that I could have such a downfall. As downfalls go, not being elected President ain't so bad.


If she ends up in prison, that's a downfall, but that possibility is a dream of right wing fanatics, not of any reasonable person.


And if I had to place a bet on one candidate for President, it would still be Hillary. People aren't ready for a self-described socialist, and all the other Democratic candidates have completely fizzled. I'll take heavy bets she is the Democratic nominee. At that point, things get rough. The country is very divided. Depending on how the campaign goes, the Republican nominee could win. The problem that party has is that, no matter who they put up, everyone knows that a vote for the Republican Presidential candidate is also a vote for the Republicans in the House of Representatives. John Boehner wasn't conservative enough for those guys, which means they are just plain nuts.

It's too bad, really. I liked McCain. I liked Romney. I could live with President Romney, but in order to take him, I had to take VP Ryan, and speaker Boehner. That wasn't going to happen, and those guys aren't extreme enough for a huge chunk of the party at this point. Nope. I can't imagine what could happen to make me vote for anyone except Hillary, as much as I would like to do so. Her singular virtue in my eyes is that she isn't as bad as any of the rest of the people she might run against.
 
Does anyone know the current state of prediction markets? What's the "good" one these days? It used to be intrade, but their site doesn't seem up to date.

I stopped over at something called predictit.org, and they had Hillary at 59 cents for a one dollar payout. Another site had her at 52 cents.

As "done" goes, that doesn't sound very done.
 
Loss Leader said:
Not unhappy enough to keep him from appointing Hillary Clinton his Secretary of State.

Honestly, if you had a single piece of additional evidence, you'd have one piece of evidence.
Click to expand...

Huh, you can't see my sig? Where Hillary talks about hard workin' white folks? and the Slate article?

I do note that your arguments from incredulity seem to exclude the possibility that Obama and the Chicago guys cut a deal with the Clinton cabal to get Clintons support in the general election.

Well anyway, arguments from incredulity rock.
 
Meadmaker said:
Does anyone know the current state of prediction markets? What's the "good" one these days? It used to be intrade, but their site doesn't seem up to date.

I stopped over at something called predictit.org, and they had Hillary at 59 cents for a one dollar payout. Another site had her at 52 cents.

As "done" goes, that doesn't sound very done.
Click to expand...

You mean if you pay 59 cents and she wins you get $1?

Who's voting against her?
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
You mean if you pay 59 cents and she wins you get $1?

Who's voting against her?
Click to expand...

Yes. And if she loses you get nothing.


It's hard to say who, if anyone, is betting against her. Technically, all they are saying is that she isn't worth 59 cents. In a prediction market, when you pay your 59 cents to buy the 1 dollar "bet", it means that someone else has sold you that bet. He's willing to pay you a dollar if Hillary wins, because he thinks it's worth the risk. If she wins, he loses 41 cents. If she loses, he gains 59 cents. He may think she is going to win, but thinks there's enough uncertainty that he's willing to place the bet.
 
Meadmaker said:
Yes. And if she loses you get nothing.


It's hard to say who, if anyone, is betting against her. Technically, all they are saying is that she isn't worth 59 cents. In a prediction market, when you pay your 59 cents to buy the 1 dollar "bet", it means that someone else has sold you that bet. He's willing to pay you a dollar if Hillary wins, because he thinks it's worth the risk. If she wins, he loses 41 cents. If she loses, he gains 59 cents. He may think she is going to win, but thinks there's enough uncertainty that he's willing to place the bet.
Click to expand...
Sounds like a good bet to make. :)
 
The betting markets are betting markets. They indicate that those who are betting fall roughly even at placing bets for or against her at the given prices. Yeah, they'll ride with the polls, but not because they actually think the probability has shifted that much. The bettors ride with the polls the bookies ride with the bettor sentiment. They want an even split in the action. At this point in the game there isn't a whole lot of action other than punters, I think.
 
Polls is polls, nothing to see...

Ben Carson is surging in the presidential race, with two recent polls of Republican primary voters showing him in first place, taking the top spot that Donald Trump had held for months. But the retired neurosurgeon's surge is showing up in a new general election poll too, with the NBC News/Wall Street Journal survey finding that Carson does the best of all the GOP candidates in a hypothetical match-up against Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton, with the two tied at 47 percent. A large part of that is due to independent voters, among whom Carson beats Clinton by 13 percentage points.

Clinton beats all the other Republican candidates in the poll, with three others coming close: Florida Senator Marco Rubio, who she beats 47 percent to 44 percent; former Florida Governor Jeb Bush, who she beats 47 percent to 43 percent; and Trump, who she beats 50 percent to 42 percent. However, Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, who is challenging Clinton for the Democratic nomination, actually does slightly better than her against Trump, who he tops 50 percent to 41 percent, and Rubio, who he beats 46 percent to 41 percent.


Read more: http://www.woai.com/onair/the-joe-p...can-front-runners-tied-14096000#ixzz3qadEtRJV
Click to expand...

First, Clinton may have repaired her image somewhat with the Democrats, but her favorability and horse-race numbers in the general electorate are horrible. The latest Quinnipiac poll, for example, tells us:

“Clinton gets crushed on character issues, pounded by [Ben] Carson and closely challenged by Sen. Ted Cruz, Donald Trump and Sen. Marco Rubio,” [said Tim Malloy, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Poll.] Clinton’s traditional lead among women evaporates as American voters pick Carson over the Democrat 50 – 40 percent. Women go 45 percent for Carson and 44 percent for Clinton, while men back the Republican 55 – 35 percent.

Rubio, Cruz and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie — three of the most likely nominees, I would argue — all beat Clinton in face-to-face match-ups. The only GOP candidate among those surveyed whom she beats is Trump, who seems less likely than at any point in the past six months to be the GOP nominee. Moreover, “Clinton has the lowest rating for honesty as American voters say 60-36 percent she is not honest and trustworthy.”
Click to expand...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...4/what-media-boosters-overlook-about-clinton/

Is Hillary unelectable?
 
16.5 said:
Huh, you can't see my sig? Where Hillary talks about hard workin' white folks? and the Slate article?

I do note that your arguments from incredulity seem to exclude the possibility that Obama and the Chicago guys cut a deal with the Clinton cabal to get Clintons support in the general election.

Well anyway, arguments from incredulity rock.
Click to expand...
How do you feel about arguments from blind hatred?
 
Grizzly Bear said:
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2008/09/the-front-runner-s-fall/306944/

An interesting read on her primary performance in 2008, but incomplete. I recall well that the primaries back then got very very nasty as the competition she had with Obama got dragged out...
Click to expand...


I don't recall it as being particularly nasty. Yes, they fought tooth and nail, but I remember it as generally respectful. Mostly I remember becoming annoyed that she and her spokespersons were spinning a tale of unreality about her path to winning the delegate count, long after that horse had already fled the barn.

The 3 AM phone call? Child's play.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom