Hillary Clinton is Done

Status
Not open for further replies.
sunmaster14 said:
Regardless of the fact that the story is crap, the question of who started it is quite relevant. If Hillary's campaign was responsible for circulating the story, it shows how ruthless her people can be in order to advance her electoral prospects. Actually, does anybody here really doubt that Hillary would do whatever it takes to win, as long as she isn't required to take any personal risk herself (hence the maintenance of plausible deniability)? She doesn't give a crap about the Democratic Party, nor about advancing any particular policy agenda. She wants power, first and foremost, but like a dog chasing a car, she doesn't really have any idea what she'll do with it if she grabs it.

To tell you the truth, that's why I don't mind her as much as other potential Democratic nominees. Well, that and the potential entertainment value of having Bill running wild in the East Wing of the White House.
Click to expand...

Yes, by all means, let's elect someone who is ambivalent about it to the hardest job in the world. That's a great plan.
 
sunmaster14 said:
Regardless of the fact that the story is crap, the question of who started it is quite relevant. If Hillary's campaign was responsible for circulating the story, it shows how ruthless her people can be in order to advance her electoral prospects. Actually, does anybody here really doubt that Hillary would do whatever it takes to win, as long as she isn't required to take any personal risk herself (hence the maintenance of plausible deniability)?
Click to expand...

7 years after this started (or more?) and we're still speaking about this in hypotheticals. I don't see a need to use hypotheticals and unconfirmed theories about her qualifications at this point. You can keep this stuff at the back of your mind should it become a more obvious concern but... the idea that she criticizes the wealthy elites for exploiting the middle class whilst remaining in bed with them is a stronger argument than speaking of whether she has plausible deniability over a conspiracy theory propagation.

sunmaster14 said:
She doesn't give a crap about the Democratic Party, nor about advancing any particular policy agenda. She wants power, first and foremost, but like a dog chasing a car, she doesn't really have any idea what she'll do with it if she grabs it.

To tell you the truth, that's why I don't mind her as much as other potential Democratic nominees. Well, that and the potential entertainment value of having Bill running wild in the East Wing of the White House.
Click to expand...
Like I have said in the past... I consider her a hypocrite and professional politician. Such issues do not automatically translate to evidence in of itself on specific allegations, hence why at this point whom started the CT is a relatively moot point right now. Obama still won, even if she did, and if ever she did something indirect like this, there's a new opportunity to review when she competes in the primaries against Sanders and/or the eventual Republican nominee. At the moment it's a weak argument, and I'm not one to make a big issue out of something that has few leads until there's reasonable doubt showing otherwise


ETA: Not that I'm trying for the apparent dog pile on this comment, but I think a substantive explanation of where I'm coming from is appropriate
 
Last edited:
sunmaster14 said:
Some politicians actually have an agenda that they'd like to see implemented. For example, Bernie Sanders would like to redistribute wealth. And Republicans either want to oppress people of color for fun, force atheists to worship God, or steal more money from poor people (some want to do all of the above). At least there's an identifiable goal there. I'm not really sure what Hillary wants to do except bask in the glory of being the first female President.
Click to expand...


Every time she appears in public, she rolls out a whole litany of things she intends to do. I wonder sometimes if you have your fingers in your ears and are screaming "Mary had a little lamb" while she's talking. That's understandable, if her voice irritates you, but it doesn't lead to your conclusion that she has no concrete goals. To be fair to you, if you're watching soundbites on cable news, you're not getting that content there either, but your conclusion still fails.
 
hgc said:
Every time she appears in public, she rolls out a whole litany of things she intends to do. I wonder sometimes if you have your fingers in your ears and are screaming "Mary had a little lamb" while she's talking. That's understandable, if her voice irritates you, but it doesn't lead to your conclusion that she has no concrete goals. To be fair to you, if you're watching soundbites on cable news, you're not getting that content there either, but your conclusion still fails.
Click to expand...

:rolleyes: OK, give me a couple of examples of concrete policies she'd like to enact. I looked over her website, and it looks like a bunch of focus-group tested fluff to me.
 
sunmaster14 said:
:rolleyes: OK, give me a couple of examples of concrete policies she'd like to enact. I looked over her website, and it looks like a bunch of focus-group tested fluff to me.
Click to expand...

There's a whole list of them here. The "Read More" link on each bullet point can be clicked for specific policies she's advocating.

Took me about 4 seconds to find.
 
hgc said:
Not fair! You were trying to find them.
Click to expand...

The sad part is, I wasn't really. I just typed "Hillary Clinton platform" into Google and went to the first link that came up. Only voice-activated search engine software would have made it easier.

Now let's all buckle up for a robust semantic debate on what "concrete" and "policies" mean.
 
That's the stuff I already found. Which of those policies do you think is concrete and worth pursuing the Presidency over? Which of those policies really gets her juices going, so to speak? Or yours?
 
sunmaster14 said:
That's the stuff I already found. Which of those policies do you think is concrete and worth pursuing the Presidency over? Which of those policies really gets her juices going, so to speak? Or yours?
Click to expand...

I've highlighted the parts you've now suddenly introduced into the conversation.

I'm not here to defend any of Hillary's policies, nor does your original criteria require me to. I only pointed out that they do, in fact, exist.

If you want to critique their necessity and efficacy, have at it.
 
And as far as "concrete", we have these two goals under her "Climate change and energy" policy:

Have more than half a billion solar panels installed across the country by the end of Hillary's first term.
Click to expand...

Generate enough renewable energy to power every home in America within 10 years of Hillary taking office.
Click to expand...


Two goals that are both quantified and given a deadline. Seems pretty concrete to me.
 
sunmaster14 said:
That's the stuff I already found. Which of those policies do you think is concrete and worth pursuing the Presidency over? Which of those policies really gets her juices going, so to speak? Or yours?
Click to expand...


Campaign finance reform -- Reverse Citizens United

Climate -- Renewable energy goals

College -- Costs relief for students at public colleges and universities

Economy -- Many of the specifics in that section, especially the investment in infrastructure and science

Healthcare -- Expanding on the ACA

Immigration reform -- Continuing to push the amnesty bill that Rubio helped write and then ran away from

Social Security and Medicare -- Fight continued Republican attempts to decimate these programs; strengthen them instead.

... and many more. These are all concrete proposals, and they get my juices flowing. I don't know about her juices, and I don't really want to think about them either.
 
It's presumably more important to get the juices flowing and be able to label someone with an ism than it is to get any actual concrete things done. What good is a list of goals if you can't dismiss it all with a single word?
 
bruto said:
It's presumably more important to get the juices flowing and be able to label someone with an ism than it is to get any actual concrete things done. What good is a list of goals if you can't dismiss it all with a single word?
Click to expand...

as long as the label isn't priapism, which appears to interfere with the flowing of .... well you get the picture....
 
plague311 said:
Why are you moving the goal posts?
Click to expand...

I did not move the goal posts. You might have to read more carefully to see that, but my questions are those that I have had from the very beginning. Hillary has nothing in the way of interesting policy proposals. Her platform is composed of nothing but vague prescriptions and hackneyed, liberal nostrums. I don't agree with Bernie Sanders, but at least I think he wants to be President in order to accomplish specific policy goals, as opposed to adopting specific policies in order to accomplish the goal of becoming President.
 
johnny karate said:
And as far as "concrete", we have these two goals under her "Climate change and energy" policy:






Two goals that are both quantified and given a deadline. Seems pretty concrete to me.
Click to expand...

Yes, no doubt that's why she's running for President. Because she desperately wants the country to have 500 million solar panels. First of all, the solar panel thing is a pile of *********. It is not even remotely feasible, and it's nothing more than a campaign talking point that has all upside and no downside because idiots will think it sounds good, and people who have a clue will dismiss it out of hand as a meaningless gesture. Second of all, what the hell is so great about solar power. Does that really get her juices flowing, or yours?
 
hgc said:
Campaign finance reform -- Reverse Citizens United

Climate -- Renewable energy goals

College -- Costs relief for students at public colleges and universities

Economy -- Many of the specifics in that section, especially the investment in infrastructure and science

Healthcare -- Expanding on the ACA

Immigration reform -- Continuing to push the amnesty bill that Rubio helped write and then ran away from

Social Security and Medicare -- Fight continued Republican attempts to decimate these programs; strengthen them instead.

... and many more. These are all concrete proposals, and they get my juices flowing. I don't know about her juices, and I don't really want to think about them either.
Click to expand...

How does any of that distinguish her from Obama, or any other liberal who would be President? These are generic policies that every liberal has to adopt in order to get past the primaries. Fine, all policitians will tailor their platform to make themselves electable. But is there one single policy that distinguishes her? One single policy position that is even slightly innovative or controversial?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom