Hillary Clinton is Done: part 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
Skeptic Ginger said:
Not going to argue this crap except to remind you if you weren't aware, the welfare reform bill was something pushed by the GOP that Clinton compromised on. It wasn't his platform per se.
Click to expand...

The pro-Hillary arguments basically boil down to

A) Bernie can't get anything done
B) Hillary is better than Trump
and
C) I'm not going to argue this crap

That's a rock-solid position, that is!
 
Axiom_Blade said:
The pro-Hillary arguments basically boil down to

A) Bernie can't get anything done
B) Hillary is better than Trump
and
C) I'm not going to argue this crap

That's a rock-solid position, that is!
Click to expand...

You are arguing with a straw man, but why let that stop you?
 
Axiom_Blade said:
The pro-Hillary arguments basically boil down to

A) Bernie can't get anything done
B) Hillary is better than Trump
and
C) I'm not going to argue this crap

That's a rock-solid position, that is!
Click to expand...

Without saying if that is the argument or not, that argument is a really good argument for Clinton. Moderate improvement compared to no improvement under Sanders? That is a reasonable position.
 
BobTheCoward said:
Without saying if that is the argument or not, that argument is a really good argument for Clinton. Moderate improvement compared to no improvement under Sanders? That is a reasonable position.
Click to expand...
I think you have a point.

I would add that another pro Hillary argument, like it or not, is that some people actually think Hillary would make a good president, and favor her. It's hard for some folks here to believe, but I'm willing to bet, for instance, that Ginger does it for free and that you'd have to pay her a whole lot not to.
 
bruto said:
I would add that another pro Hillary argument, like it or not, is that some people actually think Hillary would make a good president, and favor her.
Click to expand...

In fact "some" is "a majority of Democrat voters". I believe Clinton is currently leading in absolute votes by something like 2.5 million+ over Sanders.

Perhaps it is a case of a silent majority. Younger Democrat voters prefer Sanders, and given they have a stronger social media and online presence, and are more inclined towards activism and attending rallies, it can make it look like Sanders has much bigger support. The large number of older voters, on the other hand, have less of an online presence but are quietly showing up at the primaries and voting for Clinton.

I would be curious to see how the online Clinton-Sanders discussion are in Spanish news, forums and websites. I'm guessing support for Clinton has a stronger presence as many young Hispanics prefer Clinton.
 
Axiom_Blade said:
The pro-Hillary arguments basically boil down to

A) Bernie can't get anything done
B) Hillary is better than Trump
and
C) I'm not going to argue this crap
Click to expand...


You could further add:

D) Hillary's new jobs program is a boost to the economy. The manufacturing sector has been gutted, but the "paid shill" industry is thriving.

New catch-phrase: "Did Hillary pay you to say that?"
 
BobTheCoward said:
Without saying if that is the argument or not, that argument is a really good argument for Clinton. Moderate improvement compared to no improvement under Sanders? That is a reasonable position.
Click to expand...

Umm, you know that those are just pro Hillary arguments that bear no resemblance to reality, right, and certainly don't take into account anti Hillary arguments like the fact she is phony as a three dollar bill and is war mongering sociopath?
 
16.5 said:
Umm, you know that those are just pro Hillary arguments that bear no resemblance to reality, right, and certainly don't take into account anti Hillary arguments like the fact she is phony as a three dollar bill and is war mongering sociopath?
Click to expand...

That is what I meant by, "Without saying if that is the argument or not".

And that argument was presented as a negative by itself. Without discussing whether it is true or weighed against other arguments, the logic of the argument itself can be debated.
 
BobTheCoward said:
No evidence of shills....
Click to expand...

O RLY?

BUSTED: Pro-Clinton Super PAC Caught Spending $1 Million on Social Media Trolls

A Super PAC headed by a longtime Clinton operative is spending $1 million to hire online trolls to “correct” Bernie Sanders’ supporters on social media.

Correct The Record (CTR), which is operated by Clinton attack dog and new owner of Blue Nation Review David Brock, launched a new initiative this week called “Barrier Breakers 2016” for the purpose of debating supporters of Senator Bernie Sanders — or “Bernie Bros,” as they’re referred to in Correct the Record’s press official release — on Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, and other social media platforms.
Click to expand...
 
Axiom_Blade said:
O RLY?

BUSTED: Pro-Clinton Super PAC Caught Spending $1 Million on Social Media Trolls
Click to expand...

They would be shills only if they misrepresented themselves as "concerned citizens not getting paid".

(Actually, I'm not sure of that either. The money could be going to peope that already supported Clinton. It is unclear how much you can like a candidate before you quit being a paid shill).

We have no evidence of how people paid by this PAC represent themselves. It is pure speculation.

Not to mention calling a press release by the organization as " busted" doesn't make sense.
 
Last edited:
The kiss of death:- Charles Koch: Clinton Might Make Better President Than Republican Candidates
Koch, in an interview to air on Sunday on ABC’s “This Week” program, said that in some respects Bill Clinton had been a better president than George W. Bush... Then when asked if Hillary Clinton would be a better president than the Republicans currently running, he said, “It’s possible...

Asked if he could support Clinton over the Republicans, Koch responded, “We would have to believe her actions would be quite different than her rhetoric. Let me put it that way.”
Click to expand...
So Charles Koch thinks Hillary might do what he wants, rather than what she's telling us she will do? What more proof do we need that Hillary is untrustworthy and in bed with Wall Street?
 
Is Hillary Clinton Dishonest?

The facts don't matter - it's the narrative that counts!

when Gallup asks Americans to say the first word that comes to mind when they hear “Hillary Clinton,” the most common response can be summed up as “dishonest/liar/don’t trust her/poor character.” Another common category is “criminal/crooked/thief/belongs in jail.”

One of the perils of journalism is the human brain’s penchant for sorting information into narratives. Even false narratives can take on a life of their own because there is always information arriving that can confirm a narrative.

Thus once we in the news media had declared Gerald Ford a klutz (he was actually a graceful athlete), there were always new television clips of him stumbling. Similarly, we unfairly turned Jimmy Carter into a hapless joke, and I fear that the “Crooked Hillary” narrative will drag on much more than the facts warrant.
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom