Democratic Election Thread

[Sargon]

Clinton will be our next President. There isn't anyone that can beat her now in the election.

Wrong. I'll (maybe) come back to rub your nose in this incorrect prediction when it's beyond doubt.

[BigRedBuster]

 

Clinton will be our next President. There isn't anyone that can beat her now in the election.

Wrong. I'll (maybe) come back to rub your nose in this incorrect prediction when it's beyond doubt.

 

So....I'm assuming you think Trump is going to beat Hillary.

 

Or....are you banking on her being indicted and have to drop out?

[HuskerShark]

 

 

Clinton will be our next President. There isn't anyone that can beat her now in the election.

Wrong. I'll (maybe) come back to rub your nose in this incorrect prediction when it's beyond doubt.

 

So....I'm assuming you think Trump is going to beat Hillary.

 

Or....are you banking on her being indicted and have to drop out?

 

 

I'd guess the first, because I doubt she will be indicted (even though she should).

[mrandyk]

The Democratic party, unlike others, is far too organized to let an outsider waltz in and win their nomination. Hillary has had the nomination locked up since the Iowa primary. Hopefully some of Bernie's impact is felt though.

[darkhorse85]

What if Hillary tabs Bill as her vice president?

 

Pretty sure Bill has already tabbed himself the head of the intern program.

[Danny Bateman]

https://www.ralstonreports.com/blog/nv-democrats-file-complaint-against-sanders-campaign-dnc

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/17/us/politics/bernie-sanders-supporters-nevada.html

 

There's a certain segment of the Sanders fan base that continues to make me embarrassed to be a Democrat

 

Read the end of the letter in the first link. Listen to the voicemail on the second.

 

Look, I'm sympathetic to the guys cause and his campaign, but he needs to nip this in the bud. It's really a bad look. He refused to do so after his supporters disrupted the Trump rally in Chicago (I was actually sympathetic there too, until I learned they instigated violence), he refused to speak up when they compiled a "Superdelegate Hit List," and he hasn't done anything on this yet.

Come on, Bernie.

[Sargon]

 

 

 

Clinton will be our next President. There isn't anyone that can beat her now in the election.

Wrong. I'll (maybe) come back to rub your nose in this incorrect prediction when it's beyond doubt.

 

So....I'm assuming you think Trump is going to beat Hillary.

 

Or....are you banking on her being indicted and have to drop out?

 

I'd guess the first, because I doubt she will be indicted (even though she should).

 

The match-up is loaded with unusual high variability possibilities.

 

The first major event I anticipate is for the FBI to refer her for indictment to the Justice department. That will IMO put an end to her chances to win the general. Obama should indict her (will be his call if it's not done) but he may not anyway. If O doesn't do it the crap storm from the FBI would be epic.

 

Trump...his detractors grossly underestimate his skill at tearing apart his competition and Hillary is by far the most target rich (something else that is grossly underestimated by Dem's).

[Lil' Red]

 

 

 

 

Clinton will be our next President. There isn't anyone that can beat her now in the election.

Wrong. I'll (maybe) come back to rub your nose in this incorrect prediction when it's beyond doubt.

 

So....I'm assuming you think Trump is going to beat Hillary.

 

Or....are you banking on her being indicted and have to drop out?

 

I'd guess the first, because I doubt she will be indicted (even though she should).

 

The match-up is loaded with unusual high variability possibilities.

 

The first major event I anticipate is for the FBI to refer her for indictment to the Justice department. That will IMO put an end to her chances to win the general. Obama should indict her (will be his call if it's not done) but he may not anyway. If O doesn't do it the crap storm from the FBI would be epic.

 

Trump...his detractors grossly underestimate his skill at tearing apart his competition and Hillary is by far the most target rich (something else that is grossly underestimated by Dem's).

 

 

Last I heard, the FBI is nearing the end of their investigation and currently doesn't have enough evidence to recommend an indictment.

[BigRedBuster]

 

 

 

 

Clinton will be our next President. There isn't anyone that can beat her now in the election.

Wrong. I'll (maybe) come back to rub your nose in this incorrect prediction when it's beyond doubt.

 

So....I'm assuming you think Trump is going to beat Hillary.

 

Or....are you banking on her being indicted and have to drop out?

 

I'd guess the first, because I doubt she will be indicted (even though she should).

 

The match-up is loaded with unusual high variability possibilities.

 

The first major event I anticipate is for the FBI to refer her for indictment to the Justice department. That will IMO put an end to her chances to win the general. Obama should indict her (will be his call if it's not done) but he may not anyway. If O doesn't do it the crap storm from the FBI would be epic.

 

Trump...his detractors grossly underestimate his skill at tearing apart his competition and Hillary is by far the most target rich (something else that is grossly underestimated by Dem's).

 

I don't like Hilary and I don't want her as President.

 

But, I believe you are caught up in political propaganda that has greatly over exaggerated her legal problems.

[Sargon]

I'm not listening to propagandists but what makes you think an FBI referral isn't coming and isn't a big deal?

147 agents on the investigation and you think little or nothing will come of it?

 

I suspect it's expanded to other people doing wrong such as stripping classified headings, lying to the fbi, obfuscation, the IT guys email is now magically missing according the state dept, lying to congress (no emails ...later...well, yeah there are 10's of thousands still on the server and sorry we forgot to return all the emails to the govt 2 years ago as required).

 

It's already known the server had classified at birth emails and that intent is not the standard it's gross negligence and that ignorance is not (ever) an excuse. So some of the defensive rhetoric we've heard is flatly wrong as has been the "security review" mantra from H and her campaign. Comey just said last week in a q&a that it's not a security review and that he doesn't know what that means...it's an investigation.

 

Also I suspect she's guilty of pay for play for massive sums of money from the Saudis, Ukraine/russia, energizer, others. 147 agents need lots of tasks to stay busy.

[BigRedBuster]

There's a lot of "I suspects" in your theory there.

[Sargon]

Yes because those are my guesses. What about the questions I asked you?

[BigRedBuster]

I'm not listening to propagandists but what makes you think an FBI referral isn't coming and isn't a big deal?

147 agents on the investigation and you think little or nothing will come of it?

 

 

I'll just answer these types of questions like this.

 

I think she and her husband are right up there with the slimiest of slime ball politicians. I personally think there are things in her past where she should have been indicted much more than these emails and nothing ever came of them. You have a President who is in charge of the DOJ who is very friendly to Clinton and wants to see a Democrat in office after him.

 

I also believe that the longer this goes, the chances of anything actually coming out of the FBI drastically drops off.

 

 

And....I personally believe that political powers against her have drastically exaggerated the awful horrible facts about these emails. Put it another way, I don't believe just about anything that comes out about any of this because of the political powers behind the information machines that feed us the information.

 

 

So....when you say, "I'm not listening to propagandists"....yes you are because all of us are. You're taking "facts" fed to you by political machines and intertwining your "best guesses" which are heavily influenced by your dislike for her.

[knapplc]

I'm not listening to propagandists but what makes you think an FBI referral isn't coming and isn't a big deal?

147 agents on the investigation and you think little or nothing will come of it?

The claim that "147 FBI agents are investigating Clinton" is propaganda. It started out as misinformation, but Clinton's detractors latched onto it and have kept that misinformation alive - turning the corner into propaganda.

 

That number came from the Washington Post, who has since corrected their error. But we're still hearing this misinformation as if it's real because it makes good propaganda.

 

LINK

 

The Washington Post has retracted its anonymously sourced claim that 147 FBI agents are detailed to the investigation into former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server, and is now reporting that the real number is fewer than 50. Media outlets trumpeted the Post's report of the supposedly "staggering" number of FBI agents working the investigation as bad news for Clinton.

 

 

The Post's retraction

 

CORRECTION: An earlier version of this article incorrectly said that Clinton used two different email addresses, sometimes interchangeably, as secretary of state. She used only hdr22@clintonemail.com as secretary of state. Also, an earlier version of this article reported that 147 FBI agents had been detailed to the investigation, according to a lawmaker briefed by FBI Director James B. Comey. Two U.S. law enforcement officials have since told The Washington Post that figure is too high. The FBI will not provide an exact figure, but the officials say the number of FBI personnel involved is fewer than 50.

 

 

The sad thing is, the Post corrected their error on March 29th. But someone claiming to be "not listening to propagandists" repeats this faulty propaganda on May 18th.

[Danny Bateman]

That made my day, Knapp. I hadn't seen the retraction yet.

 

The Benghazi investigation is another example of partisan forces at play trying to drum up the seriousness of a situation. It's old hat and standard fare with Republicans dealing with Clinton. But don't take my word for it, listen to the House Majority Leader, Kevin McCarthy, on Hannity:

 

 

"Everybody thought Hillary Clinton was unbeatable, right?" McCarthy had said. "But we put together a Benghazi special committee, a select committee. What are her numbers today? Her numbers are dropping. Why? Because she's untrustable. But no one would have known any of that had happened had we not fought."

 

My article has another Republican saying the same thing. All the Democrats are pissed, including ones on the committee. The ranking Dem openly calls for the committee to be disbanded. And here's another snippet from Wikipedia:

 

 

In October 2015, Bradley F. Podliska, who worked on the committee as a staffer, claimed that the purpose of the committee was political, and that he was fired from the committee for going on military orders and for not focusing his research on Clinton.^[56] In a statement, the committee denied Podliska's allegations about why he was fired and defended the objectivity of the panel's investigation.

 

Remember folks, this committee is going on two years now and has found nothing. This is your taxpayer dollars, hard at work. What a crock...

 

Sargon, you're totally entitled to your opinions. Just realize you're basing them on intuitions at this point, and the facts don't necessarily back them up. That's not to say they're wrong, just that they're not yet supported...