Hillary Clinton is Done: part 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
varwoche said:
Your commentary isn't at all in sync with your citation.

Clinton won Nevada. Why then is it noteworthy that her delegates outnumbered Sanders' delegates by a small margin?
Click to expand...


These are delegates in addition (hence "additional") to the ones from the caucus, where Killary got 13 and Bernie 10.
 
Childlike Empress said:
These are delegates in addition (hence "additional") to the ones from the caucus, where Killary got 13 and Bernie 10.
Click to expand...
There were 12 "additional" delegates. Clinton got 7, Sanders 5. The evidence you have provided showing that something improper happened is precisely nil.

p.s. I can't play the drinking game just yet. It's too early here on the west coast for tequila shots.
 
Nevada Democrats defend exclusion of Bernie convention delegates that led to explosion of anger

Nevada’s Democratic State Committee defended excluding 58 Bernie Sanders’ delegates at their convention Saturday night, saying they failed to register properly as Democrats before the final caucus.

At the contentious convention, held in the Paris hotel in Las Vegas, scuffles broke out as Sanders’ supporters claimed that the state party subverted the will of the voters by awarding more pledged delegates to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

According to the Las Vegas Sun, Clinton took 20 of the 35 pledged delegates Nevada will send to the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia this summer.

Sanders supporters — who outnumbered fans of Clinton — shouted down speakers, with California Sen. Barbara Boxer called a “b*tch” as she tried to speak. Supporters of the Vermont senator complained bitterly as Democratic leaders quickly attempted to gavel the proceedings to a close.

https://www.rawstory.com/2016/05/ne...ion-delegates-that-led-to-explosion-of-anger/
Click to expand...


"Scuffles broke out" as the #NeverHillary crowd keeps growing and getting louder each day...
 
varwoche said:
There were 12 "additional" delegates. Clinton got 7, Sanders 5. The evidence you have provided showing that something improper happened is precisely nil.
Click to expand...


Yes, that's in the article and in my citation, I was aware of that without your bold wisenheimer comment. I provided information about the reason why the Sanders supporters behaved like they did, and made an eye-rolling comment referring to the robot-like response moaning about how "classy" they were, giving not a damn about any reasons.

varwoche said:
p.s. I can't play the drinking game just yet. It's too early here on the west coast for tequila shots.
Click to expand...


Guess how much I care.
 
Regarding Clinton being influenced by big donors I think this selection from Obama's 2006 book "The Audacity of Hope" is very important.

https://books.google.com/books?id=k...q="audacity of hope" "i can't assume"&f=false

I can’t assume that the money chase didn’t alter me in some ways. …

Increasingly I found myself spending time with people of means — law firm partners and investment bankers, hedge fund managers and venture capitalists. As a rule, they were smart, interesting people, knowledgeable about public policy, liberal in their politics, expecting nothing more than a hearing of their opinions in exchange for their checks. But they reflected, almost uniformly, the perspectives of their class: the top 1 percent or so of the income scale that can afford to write a $2,000 check to a political candidate. They believed in the free market and an educational meritocracy; they found it hard to imagine that there might be any social ill that could not be cured by a high SAT score. They had no patience with protectionism, found unions troublesome, and were not particularly sympathetic to those whose lives were upended by the movements of global capital. Most were adamantly prochoice and antigun and were vaguely suspicious of deep religious sentiment.

And although my own worldview and theirs corresponded in many ways — I had gone to the same schools, after all, had read the same books, and worried about my kids in many of the same ways — I found myself avoiding certain topics during conversations with them, papering over possible differences, anticipating their expectations. On core issues I was candid; I had no problem telling well-heeled supporters that the tax cuts they’d received from George Bush should be reversed. Whenever I could, I would try to share with them some of the perspectives I was hearing from other portions of the electorate: the legitimate role of faith in politics, say, or the deep cultural meaning of guns in rural parts of the state.

Still, I know that as a consequence of my fund-raising I became more like the wealthy donors I met, in the very particular sense that I spent more and more of my time above the fray, outside the world of immediate hunger, disappointment, fear, irrationality, and frequent hardship of the other 99 percent of the population — that is, the people that I’d entered public life to serve. And in one fashion or another, I suspect this is true for every senator: The longer you are a senator, the narrower the scope of your interactions. You may fight it, with town hall meetings and listening tours and stops by the old neighborhood. But your schedule dictates that you move in a different orbit from most of the people you represent.

And perhaps as the next race approaches, a voice within tells you that you don’t want to have to go through all the misery of raising all that money in small increments all over again. You realize that you no longer have the cachet you did as the upstart, the fresh face; you haven’t changed Washington, and you’ve made a lot of people unhappy with difficult votes. The path of least resistance — of fund-raisers organized by the special interests, the corporate PACs, and the top lobbying shops — starts to look awfully tempting, and if the opinions of these insiders don’t quite jibe with those you once held, you learn to rationalize the changes as a matter of realism, of compromise, of learning the ropes. The problems of ordinary people, the voices of the Rust Belt town or the dwindling heartland, become a distant echo rather than a palpable reality, abstractions to be managed rather than battles to be fought."
Click to expand...

Sometimes there is overt corruption with big donations, but even if there isn't, there is still a pervasive subtle shift that occurs over time where you become disconnected from the realities and concerns of the majority of average citizens you are supposed to serve and become ever more insulated and aligned with the wealthy and their interests.
 
Childlike Empress said:
Yes, that's in the article and in my citation, I was aware of that without your bold wisenheimer comment. I provided information about the reason why the Sanders supporters behaved like they did, and made an eye-rolling comment referring to the robot-like response moaning about how "classy" they were, giving not a damn about any reasons.
Click to expand...
You also said she played "tricks". What tricks were those?
 
Bill Clinton Would Be 'In Charge of Revitalizing the Economy,' Hillary Clinton Says (May 15, 2016)

Hillary Clinton has always made known that she wants Bill Clinton to have some kind of role in the White House should she become president, but over the past few weeks she's begun to reveal more about what exactly that would be.

During a campaign event in Fort Mitchell today, the Democratic presidential candidate was more blunt than ever about what her husband's role could be in a future Clinton administration — saying she plans to put the former president "in charge of economic revitalization."

"My husband, who I'm going to put in charge of revitalizing the economy, cause you know he knows how to do it," Clinton told the crowd at an outdoor organizing rally. "And especially in places like coal country and inner cities and other parts of our country that have really been left out."

"I've told my husband he's got to come out of retirement and be in charge of this because you know he’s got more ideas a minute than anybody I know," she said, while talking about manufacturing and jobs.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/bill...ing-economy-hillary-clinton/story?id=39132832
Click to expand...


Crooked Hillary is actually pleading the case for a co-presidency repeat -- an echo of Bill Clinton's controversial statement during the 1992 campaign that voters would get "two for the price of one" if they elected him.

"My husband has got more ideas a minute than anybody I know," Crooked Hillary said.

Yeah, and nearly all of Bill's ideas involve White House interns and an ample supply of cigars.
 
Once again Bernie's supporters show that Math is far from their strong suit.

So.. 23 Delegates with Hillary getting 13 and Bernie 10

This means that Hillary has 56.5% and Bernie 43.5%

56.5% of 12 = 6.78

since we can't have 0.78 of a delegate we round up to 7

Thus Hillary gets 7, Bernie gets 5

Simple math.
 
Hillary can lose:
More than a dozen Clinton allies identified weaknesses in her candidacy that may erode her prospects of defeating Donald Trump, including poor showings with young women, untrustworthiness, unlikability and a lackluster style on the stump.
Click to expand...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...2f4d7e-1874-11e6-924d-838753295f9a_story.html

Say whatever you want about Clinton’s lengthy résumé—and her credentials are indeed impressive—her performance this primary season is hardly indicative of a strong candidate.
Click to expand...
http://www.salon.com/2016/05/14/thi...blem_isnt_bernie_sanders_its_hillary_clinton/
 
Last edited:
Childlike Empress said:
Advise: Avoid applying simple math without basic logic. Why would they wait three months to perform your impressive operation? It's a bit more complicated.
Click to expand...
What was the "trick" CE?

Answer: There were no tricks. (Or at least, evidence of trickery hasn't been presented.) You reflexively posted anti-Clinton nonsense, followed by transparent evasion. Highly unimpressive.
 
The Clinton sleaze never ends

The Wall Street Journal reported Friday that the Clinton Foundation in 2010 committed $2 million to Energy Pioneer Solutions, despite IRS rules that say a charity is not “supposed to act in anyone’s private interests.” The ex-president even personally arranged a US Energy Department grant to the company.

Among the firm’s owners are several longtime Clinton friends — including a wealthy blond divorcée from Chappaqua whose relationship with Bill has long been the subject of speculation. The Journal reports that the foundation even removed the fiscal link from its Web site to avoid calling attention to Bill’s “friendship.”

So we’re back to that again.

Smirking aside, though, the Clinton Foundation has been embroiled in one financial scandal after another. Last fall, it had to amend four years of tax filings to come clean about $20 million in foreign donations it received while Hillary served as secretary of state.

Of course, the Clintons and dubious dealings go shamelessly hand in hand. Always have, always will.

http://nypost.com/2016/05/15/the-clinton-sleaze-never-ends/
Click to expand...


Bill's so-called "friendship", and no doubt fellow cigar aficionado, is 54 year old blonde bombshell Julie Tauber McMahon of Chappaqua, N.Y., a close friend and neighbor of Mr. Clinton.

There is probably not a single skirt in all of Chappaqua that Bill hasn't chased. But far more troubling are the $20 million in foreign donations to the Clinton Foundation, which occurred while Crooked Hillary was serving as Secretary of State.

The Clinton sleaze just never ends.

Reference:
http://www.wsj.com/articles/clinton-charity-aided-clinton-friends-1463086383
 
Last edited:
Slings and Arrows said:
Bill's so-called "friendship", and no doubt fellow cigar aficionado, is 54 year old blonde bombshell Julie Tauber McMahon of Chappaqua, N.Y., a close friend and neighbor of Mr. Clinton.

There is probably not a single skirt in all of Chappaqua that Bill hasn't chased. But far more troubling are the $20 million in foreign donations to the Clinton Foundation, which occurred while Crooked Hillary was serving as Secretary of State.

The Clinton sleaze just never ends.

Reference:
http://www.wsj.com/articles/clinton-charity-aided-clinton-friends-1463086383
Click to expand...

Slings and Arrows said:
"I don't think Donald Trump is being judged based on his personal life." -- RNC Chairman Reince Priebus

The Democratic voters defiantly turned a blind eye to Bill Clinton's improper dalliances (Can I offer you a cigar?), and now the Republican voters are determined to follow suit. Poetic justice!
Click to expand...

tyr_13 said:
And Republican voters can forever forfeit any claim of superior person character or morality in their politicians as they have been for years, because they've nominated Trump.

Also, people will have to stop being critical of Bill Clinton's dalliances. Wait, no, you will. You cannot reasonably criticize Bill for it anymore. You never could reasonably hold those against Hillary in the first place, but now they're downright laughable.

Poetic justice is you're condemning your own argument.
Click to expand...

Your argument is invalidated by you yourself.
 
tyr_13 said:
Your argument is invalidated by you yourself.
Click to expand...


"But far more troubling are the $20 million in foreign donations to the Clinton Foundation, which occurred while Crooked Hillary was serving as Secretary of State."

Must have overlooked that part, eh?
 
Well, to answer the topic: Hillary is certainly not done. Oh no no no. She's doing very very good











..... so far

#chaostheory
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom