Damn you are booring
Shaw... I saw that video earlier today... but will it make a difference?Check out this imagined conversation for the upcoming debates... it from The Week, by Paul Waldman.Trump: I was totally against the war in Iraq.Clinton: No you weren't. You told Howard Stern you supported it, and that was the only public comment you made before the war began. It wasn't until the war started going badly that you began criticizing it. Every independent fact-checker has examined this claim, and they all say you're not telling the truth.Trump: What, a bunch of dishonest liberal media types? Pshaw. I was totally against it. It was in all the papers. The Bush administration was so worried about how vocal I was, they sent a delegation to beg me to be quiet.Clinton: That's ludicrous. Do you have one iota of evidence you can show us to prove that ever happened?Trump: It happened, believe me. I was against it, you were for it, end of story.How does she answer that? She will be there looking flummoxed. Donald trump is playing the political game on a level where truth does not matter. People want a certain kind of President this year. Sadly, it doesn't look as if that President will have the name Clinton attached to it.Perhaps it is because people like ANON, just don't care about facts.
If Trump acts anything like he did during the primary "debates," he'll bluster, talkover, lie, bluster, pout, lie.But he'll also show his appalling ignorance. The moderators will have to ask questions that will require knowledge, and complexity of intellect. We know Trump has neither. Just the other day he popped off with the ludicrous statement that the way to handle rape in the military is for the military to set up its own military justice system. My 12 year old grandson knows this. How could Trump live to be 70 and be so ignorant on this? He won't convince his supporters because they've shown themselves impervious to facts and to what a disaster of a human being he truly is. But the independents and undecideds will see him as the fraud and charlatan that he is.
Hopefully, or we're looking at Trump the Lying Dumper and WATB<in the Oval Office come January 207.
Shaw... you have a lot more faith in the electorate than me.I hope that faith is rewarded. I continue to be stunned that longtime friends and believers can abandon years of their stated values simply to vote against someone they hate. Another value they cannot defend.It's stunning.At the very least, I think they could be agnostic towards both HRC and Trump.
Dave,You're not helping. I don't understand why you feel motivated to contribute. Of course, you have the right to speak your opinion. But I just don't get it. Lately you have identified as a liberal, and I guess, a democrat. I know for a fact that whatever animosity you feel towards Clinton is unfounded. It just doesn't make any sense. I get that she is not sexy or charismatic like her husband, but they are both the same person.I can't stand idly by to tolerate tepid support of Clinton, let alone outright hostility such as you have continued to show. I find it difficult to believe that you have swallowed the Citizens United bait, hook, line and sinker. I'm going to chalk it off to good old fashioned male chauvinism.
It’s no secret that, from the moment she announced her candidacy back in April 2015, Hillary Clinton has been bludgeoned by negative media coverage. The email server; the Wall Street speaking fees; the attacks from both Trump and Sanders. I’ve debated with people who legitimately fear she will be imprisoned before the election. Some, despite the venomous dismissal of my rolling eyes, have called her a murderer. Others: an old woman, a plutocrat, a crook, abused by her husband, no backbone to speak of. But if you’ve suspected that there’s a reason people are saying these things—perhaps parroting disproportionately negative stories they’ve consumed in the media over the past year-and-a-half—it turns out you’re right.A new report released this week by Harvard Kennedy School’s Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics, and Public Policy found Clinton has received far more negative coverage than any other candidate in the race thus far. The study was based on an analysis of news statements from CBS, Fox, the Los Angeles Times, NBC, the New York Times, USA Today, the Wall Street Journal, and the Washington Post.The rest of the story HERE.
And it's no secret that Donald Trump is magnitudes worse than Hillary Clinton is on her worst day.The "dishonesty" label is risible. Trump's lies have been tracked for months and months and he's been shown to be an unapologetic liar/bullshitter like we've never seen in our lifetime.Those people who call Hillary "dishonest," "untrustworthy," are being willfully blind to a man who makes Hillary look like a piker. So people distrust Hillary and they'll vote for a scoundrel who has problems with his scam of a Trump University, paying off AGs who withdraw investigations into said University, taking money from a charitable foundation to pay of law suits. And speaking of law suits, how many is Trump facing? The MSM has let Don the Con get away with a mountain of dishonesty, lies, and the absolute worst is his years and years of casting aspersions on where our first African-American president was born.That alone should have disqualified the charlatan from getting anywhere near elective office, but...but Hillary's emails!!!!!! Happily, right now, the polls are showing she's regaining her lead.Don the Con, who, in addition to be a scoundrel, knows nothing about governing, and worse, he knows nothing about our Constitution.
FJ... I'm not here to help perse. Shaw publishes a post, and others comment on it. I was not aware our job was to parrot a specific line.I feel motivated to comment because...1. Shaw is a friend.2. I love her blog and have been reading it for years.3. Generally, but not always, I agree with her politics.4. I feel like I have an affinity with most of the other people who comment here.As for my animosity toward HRC, I believe my it is "founded" or perhaps warranted is a better word. She has struggled with honesty. I am not talking about the garden variety stuff that makes up political campaigns. I'm talking about other issues. Issues like her claim that she was under sniper fire in Bosnia. It's not that she shaded the truth, it's that it was a total fabrication. There was no basis in truth at all. in fact, she was greeting by a ceremony announcing her arrival.Lies like Bill's to cover his escapades, I can understand. but this was totally unforced and unnecessary.Her recent illness is another example. First we hear from her campaign that she was just overheated. Then as details of the reality of her condition became apparent, the truth, grudgingly came out. Another unforced error.Behind all of this are her emails, and her response, which even a charitable person would say have changed numerous times as she has tried to explain it. And that was before she tried to drag Colin Powell into her reasoning.All of these to me, show a tin political ear, and I do not believe that will serve her well in office.I've held my vote in the past. If I am honest, while I do not support her, if the numbers here in Nevada continue to favor Trump, she will probably get my vote. But because as we say in Mexico... she is "el menos mal".I'm sorry if tepid support is not good enough for you. But tepid is as good as it gets for Hillary. I've been a registered Dem all my life, but I've never been a straight line lever puller.This election seems to be calling us to be just that, or risk alienation, from both parties. If that is true, we're in bad shape, because it allows the main political parties to put deeply flawed candidates on the ballot.If Donald Trump and HRC are the best America has to offer, and refusal to go all in for either candidate is seen as unacceptable, then we are worse off than I thought.As for male chauvinism... really?Cheers, amigo...
@Flying Junior, I'm not sure you were addressing your comment above at me but I suspect you were. If so, and if you're really interested in a response or in understanding my views and position on HRC feel free to email me @ email@example.com. I will not be responding on this thred.Les Carpenter, CPT, CES
Ms.Shaw, what poll's are you looking at? As of today Trump is solidly ahead in Fl,Oh,Nv and NC.
Shaw said: and with a straight face may I add."And it's no secret that Donald Trump is magnitudes worse than Hillary Clinton is on her worst day.The "dishonesty" label is risible. Trump's lies have been tracked for months and months and he's been shown to be an unapologetic liar/bullshitter like we've never seen in our lifetime.Those people who call Hillary "dishonest," "untrustworthy," are being willfully blind to a man who makes Hillary look like a piker. So people distrust Hillary and they'll vote for a scoundrel who has problems with his scam of a Trump University, paying off AGs who withdraw investigations into said University, taking money from a charitable foundation to pay of law suits. And speaking of law suits, how many is Trump facing? The MSM has let Don the Con get away with a mountain of dishonesty, lies, and the absolute worst is his years and years of casting aspersions on where our first African-American president was born.That alone should have disqualified the charlatan from getting anywhere near elective office, but...but Hillary's emails!!!!!! Happily, right now, the polls are showing she's regaining her lead.Don the Con, who, in addition to be a scoundrel, knows nothing about governing, and worse, he knows nothing about oOur Constitution."Shaw, do your actually believe that Horse Manure?
Can't believe I missed that you addressed your comment to Dave Fying Junior! But I did. Perhaps my age and I'm developing tunnel vision.Anyway, time for a craft brew after a tedious day of more of the same.Cheers!
I actually believe fivethirtyeight, A. Reader:Who will win the presidency?Chance of winningFiveThirtyEightHillary Clinton59.6%Donald Trump40.3%FiveThirtyEight
RN, no harm; no foul.
supported Bernie during the primary and while I've never had anything against Hillary, I'd also never been a huge fan. I guess you'd say I was apathetic to her, based mostly on her penchant for war hawking. I've never bought into the 30 + year onslaught from the radical right against her and, in fact, that's pushed me lately more into her camp. I have been working to help get her elected here in Florida and I do so with pride. She'll easily win South Florida but with the politically moronic old timers in the rest of the state, I'm not holding out much hope for her to win Florida. Still, she doesn't need to and Dishonest Donny has almost no path to 270 unless we massively let down our guard. With the Supreme court in the balance, there's no way I'll not work my hardest to get out the vote for Hillary. NO way.
To "A. Reader,"From Real Clear Politics:Hillary Clinton has a healthy lead over Donald Trump with just days until the first presidential debate, according to a new poll released Thursday by Associated Press/Gfk.Clinton 45 (+6)Trump 39Johnson 9Stein 2realclearpolitics.comIn a head-to-head matchup against Trump, the Democratic nominee hits the critical 50-percent mark and beats Trump by six points among likely voters. In a hypothetical contest that includes third-party candidates Gary Johnson and Jill Stein, Clinton maintains her six-point edge over Trump and beats him by a margin of 45 percent to 39 percent.
Bluebull, I lived in Florida for 10 years. I wish I were there to join you in working for Hillary. Good going!
Hillary is tied with Trump in North Carolina!She shouldn't even be competitive, and she's tied!From the New York Times: "Well-educated white voters are rejecting Republican candidates in North Carolina, and it might just be enough to jeopardize the chances of Donald J. Trump to win the presidency and of his party to keep the Senate.Hillary Clinton and Mr. Trump are tied, 41 percent to 41 percent, among likely voters in a three-way race in North Carolina, according to a New York Times Upshot/Siena College poll released on Thursday. Mrs. Clinton leads by two percentage points in a head-to-head contest, 45 percent to 43 percent. (In a three-way race, 11 percent of likely voters picked the Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson; the Green Party candidate Jill Stein is not on the ballot in North Carolina.)The presidential contest might be the least of the Republican Party’s worries in this rapidly changing state. The embattled Republican governor, Pat McCrory, trails by eight points against Attorney General Roy Cooper, 50 percent to 42 percent.And even Senator Richard Burr, who was not thought to be in great jeopardy just a few months ago, trails his Democratic challenger, Deborah Ross, by four points, 46-42. That contest is among the handful that seem likely to decide control of the Senate.It is her largest lead in a public survey so far, and in general, the poll offers stronger results for Democrats than several surveys in the state this month.""We have to stop being the Stupid Party." -- former Republican Governor of Louisiana, Bobby Jindal
Shaw... The GOP can't help themselves... They are exactly what Jindal feared.And now Cruz is endorsing... Do these guys really think they have credibility with the larger electorate? You know, the group that isn't stupid?
Post a Comment