Hillary Clinton is Done: part 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bob001 said:
And what explanation for her refusal to release the transcripts boils down to anything other than "None of your business?" HDS could also mean "Hillary Delusion Syndrome," afflicting those who believe that this veteran politico can do no wrong.
Click to expand...

This question has been repeatedly answered, yet gets asked anew every couple of days. I wonder why our resident spam monitor hasn't reported it?
 
"I have a lot of experience dealing with men who sometimes get off the reservation in the way they behave and how they speak." -- Hillary Clinton on CNN (April 29, 2016)

It sounds like Hillary has "men" issues.

Is she a sexist?
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
:sdl:

As bad as? Trump is a disaster waiting to happen, a CTer, mentally disturbed, a liar, a hypocrite to the nth degree.

No way have I said as bad as, Trump is so much worse than Clinton it's hard to adequately describe.
Click to expand...

Then Trump was probably not the best example to use for your "tu quoquery", was it now?
 
16.5 said:
HDS! Drink!

Accusing people of HDS seems to be some mystical talisman that automagically neutralizes obvious criticism of Hillary.

Leave Hillary alone!

lol
Click to expand...

No, nothing magical about identifying an HDS criticism. Especially one that is both never leveled at any other candidate, and also one that the critic would never accept an answer to.
 
wareyin said:
This question has been repeatedly answered, yet gets asked anew every couple of days. I wonder why our resident spam monitor hasn't reported it?
Click to expand...

Your links all come down to "Giving in would show weakness." The problem is imagining that giving voters more information is seen as "giving in" and "showing weakness." Does she see us as the enemy? If she had provided transcripts the first time reporters asked, it would have been a one-day story (assuming you're right about the content), and nobody would be talking about them now. How secretive you do want a President to be when s/he's considering tax policy or deciding whether to go to war?
 
Last edited:
Bob001 said:
Your links all come down to "Giving in would show weakness." The problem is imagining that giving voters more information is seen as "giving in" and "showing weakness." If she had provided transcripts the first time reporters asked, it would have been a one-day story (assuming you're right about the content), and nobody would be talking about them now. How secretive you do want a President to be when s/he's considering tax policy or deciding whether to go to war?
Click to expand...
No, the problem is imagining that those demanding these transcripts would be satisfied with them, and not go on to ever more demands. See: Obama birth certificate
 
sunmaster14 said:
She's the one who put herself in this position by giving highly paid speeches to not just any old Wall Street bank, but arguably the most aggressive, ruthless, and politically connected Wall Street bank currently in existence.
Click to expand...

I have to agree. I also agree that the best strategy is to not release the transcripts. But I don't think her supporters can say much when people point out that she gave private speeches to GS and is not releasing the transcripts. The only response I can think of is: yeah, that doesn't look good.

Note the lack of an words after the "."? That was intentional.
 
sunmaster14 said:
She's the one who put herself in this position by giving highly paid speeches to not just any old Wall Street bank, but arguably the most aggressive, ruthless, and politically connected Wall Street bank currently in existence.
Click to expand...

Gosh, it's a good thing no other candidate (cough, Trump, cough, cough) has given highly paid speeches to various aggressive, ruthless, and politically connected businesses! Oh, wait...
 
wareyin said:
Gosh, it's a good thing no other candidate (cough, Trump, cough, cough) has given highly paid speeches to various aggressive, ruthless, and politically connected businesses! Oh, wait...
Click to expand...


We know all about the speeches Trump gave at the 'Real Estate Wealth Expo' -- those were open to the public.

What other speeches are you referring to? The article you linked to doesn't mention any other speech; just baseless innuendos.
 
Last edited:
Slings and Arrows said:
We know all about the speeches Trump gave at the 'Real Estate Wealth Expo' -- those were open to public.

What other speeches are you referring to? The article you linked to doesn't mention any other speech; just baseless innuendos.
Click to expand...

And the transcripts to these speeches you know all about are...?
 
Slings and Arrows said:
"I have a lot of experience dealing with men who sometimes get off the reservation in the way they behave and how they speak." -- Hillary Clinton on CNN (April 29, 2016)

It sounds like Hillary has "men" issues.

Is she a sexist?
Click to expand...

Based on your post, I don't believe you know what sexist means. :rolleyes:
 
wareyin said:
And the transcripts to these speeches you know all about are...?
Click to expand...


I don't know if there are any transcripts to Trump's 'Real Estate Wealth Expo' speeches; can't say for sure.

But it was a public event. Thousands of people attended. It was just Trump telling the audience how he made money in the real estate business. That's all it was.
 
Slings and Arrows said:
I don't know if there are any transcripts to Trump's 'Real Estate Wealth Expo' speeches; can't say for sure.

But it was a public event. Thousands of people attended. It was just Trump telling the audience how he made money in the real estate business. That's all it was.
Click to expand...
No transcripts, got it.
 
wareyin said:
No, the problem is imagining that those demanding these transcripts would be satisfied with them, and not go on to ever more demands. See: Obama birth certificate
Click to expand...

Good example. When the birthers started claiming that the official "short-form" birth certificate wasn't the original, the response was "That's good enough" or "It's legal for all purposes" or "That's all you need" or "That's all we can get." The administration waited almost three years to obtain the "long form" bc. Releasing it pretty much shut down all but the craziest birthers, but people who had already formed an opinion often didn't change it. The administration could have squashed the birthers by responding decisively much earlier.

The transcript thing allows the Republicans to fuel the worst suspicions about Hillary among people who already don't trust her. The next step will be to circulate false transcripts, or real snippets taken out of context. But sooner or later she'll have to provide them, or someone else will (I'll bet the stenographer has a price in mind) and it will be a much bigger story than it should have been.
 
Slings and Arrows said:
I don't know if there are any transcripts to Trump's 'Real Estate Wealth Expo' speeches; can't say for sure.

But it was a public event. Thousands of people attended. It was just Trump telling the audience how he made money in the real estate business. That's all it was.
Click to expand...

But if there WERE transcripts then... they should be released!

We know Hillary has them, so lets get those out pronto!

Everyone should release all their paid speech transcripts immediately

Success!

(that is yet another reason why tu quoque arguments are so terrible)
 
wareyin said:
Gosh, it's a good thing no other candidate (cough, Trump, cough, cough) has given highly paid speeches to various aggressive, ruthless, and politically connected businesses! Oh, wait...
Click to expand...

What could Trump be saying privately that's worse than what he says on camera? Trump has a long, documented history of supporting numerous candidates and causes, sometimes flipping within days, and saying things that are blatantly offensive if not downright nonsensical. If anything, private transcripts might -- maybe -- reveal him to be smarter and more thoughtful than he sounds on the stump. I say again, comparing Hillary to Trump is not much of a defense.
 
Bob001 said:
Good example. When the birthers started claiming that the official "short-form" birth certificate wasn't the original, the response was "That's good enough" or "It's legal for all purposes" or "That's all you need" or "That's all we can get." The administration waited almost three years to obtain the "long form" bc. Releasing it pretty much shut down all but the craziest birthers, but people who had already formed an opinion often didn't change it. The administration could have squashed the birthers by responding decisively much earlier.

The transcript thing allows the Republicans to fuel the worst suspicions about Hillary among people who already don't trust her. The next step will be to circulate false transcripts, or real snippets taken out of context. But sooner or later she'll have to provide them, or someone else will (I'll bet the stenographer has a price in mind) and it will be a much bigger story than it should have been.
Click to expand...

Yes, the ODS sufferers first demanded evidence of Obama's birth that they did not demand of other candidates, then refused to accept the evidence provided. After 3 years of badgering, Obama released the long form, and they still did not accept it. I wonder why caving in to HDS sufferer demands would turn out any different?
 
Bob001 said:
What could Trump be saying privately that's worse than what he says on camera? Trump has a long, documented history of supporting numerous candidates and causes, sometimes flipping within days, and saying things that are blatantly offensive if not downright nonsensical. If anything, private transcripts might -- maybe -- reveal him to be smarter and more thoughtful than he sounds on the stump. I say again, comparing Hillary to Trump is not much of a defense.
Click to expand...

It's not a defense to point out that you (general) are demanding things only of Clinton. The claim that Trump's speeches were able to be seen if one purchased a ticket does not change the fact that no one is asking for speech transcripts from anyone but Clinton. Hence, the HDS designation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom