Support NeoGAF

[Intheflorsh]

Who told her this was a good idea? Jesus, talk about being tone deaf.

What an idiot. All she has to do is shut up for a week or two.

 

[EatinOlives]

This thread has reached full on insane. Trump would not be a lame duck. And the president doesn't write legislation.

Do you think people making those statements are actually informed?

 

[cheezcake]

This is the dumbest shit for so many reasons. There are just so many layers of dumb.

Dumb 1.) The idea that anyone thinks this shit put a thumb on the scale for Clinton during the primaries. She was going to a debate in Michigan. No fucking shit she would get a question about lead poisoning.

Dumb 2.) Clinton is the single most overprepared debater in American history. Only a complete moron (or a horrendous underpreparer like Bernie Sanders) wouldn't see that question coming from a million miles away. Who the fuck think she needed or wanted that question?

Dumb 3.) That Donna Brazile is so fucking incalculably stupid that she would take such a high risk/low reward gambit. Like how fucking incompetent are you politically that you thought it was worth telling Clinton she was gonna get a question on lead poisoning in fucking Michigan? Fire her stupid ass.

Dumb 4.) That Bernie Sanders would have won without petty shit like this. He lost because he was atrocious at appealing to one of Democrats core constituencies - minorities - abandoned the southern states and was caught multiple times being unprepared for the same exact basic questions in interviews. He lost by 3.6 million votes. It wasnt close. It wasnt going to be close because of a fucking question about lead poisoning in Michigan being leaked. Get the motherfuck over it Bernie Stans and stop embarrassing your political neophyte asses.

Dumb 5.) That anyone is still acting like this election should be a question. No both sides are not the same. No we are not picking between the lesser of two evils, only one evil and one supremely competent yet flawed candidate. End your idealism. Any president you love has their demons. We pick human beings not goddamn Gods.

I've only seen a handful of posts in this thread which imply your points 1,4 and 5. Most people are understandably disapproving of the actions of Brazile and the Clinton campaign because they are undoubtedly unethical. You should be able to point out negative actions of candidate A without others emotionally reacting to it as tacit support of candidate B, it does nothing but lower the level of discourse in the thread. Now on the scale of bad this is still a 2/10 where Trump's floor is basically a 6/10 these days, but nonetheless, it's still bad.

 

[Amir0x]

Do you think people making those statements are actually informed?

Seems to be a theme

 

[bengraven]

Another thing that's not really a thing that the uninformed can make a thing out of.

And yet they are. I heard about this from a group of right wingers who say Clinton paid CNN for the questions. They were convinced that.

 

[Dr. Feel Good]

You can either address the issues raised, or try to be passive aggressive. I take shit head on and explain myself. You do the same or ignore it. Showing you have no interest in elaborating on your views does not earn respect.

If you hate Hillary Clinton so much you vote for Trump, you are a racist, bigot, xenophobe or misogynist. Period. No excuses allowed. We see the differences. Nobody is going to allow that behavior to stand unmolested. This isn't a typical election and the choices aren't going to be treated typically. Take responsibility for your choices and own it. We have an alt-right monster running for president with literally more scandals attached to him than any candidate in history. And then you have someone who careless mishandled email servers. People need to get a grip, and if they are so ignorant they refuse to, they are going to have their absurd positions called out. And if you can't deal with self-evidently stupid positions being called dumb, that's on you.

You can raise issues without being a prick about it though. Why would anyone want to have discussion with you when you constantly revert to being overly aggressive and an asshole? Let's not act like you don't have a history of this behavior.

I voted Hillary already, so I don't really have a platform to argue with you against. I just can't stand reading your posts because you represent one of the worst kind of forum posters especially when it comes to politics. Calm down man.

 

[lastflowers]

You can raise issues without being a prick about it though. Why would anyone want to have discussion with you when you constantly revert to being overly aggressive and an asshole? Let's not act like you don't have a history of this behavior.

I voted Hillary already, I don't really have a platform to argue with you against. I just can't stand reading your posts because you represent one of the worst kind of forum posters especially when it comes to politics. Calm down man.

This is amir0x's MO.

 

[Amir0x]

I've only seen a handful of posts in this thread which imply your points 1,4 and 5. Most people are understandably disapproving of the actions of Brazile and the Clinton campaign because they are undoubtedly unethical. You should be able to point out negative actions of candidate A without others emotionally reacting to it as tacit support of candidate B, it does nothing but lower the level of discourse in the thread. Now on the scale of bad this is still a 2/10 where Trump's floor is basically a 6/10 these days, but nonetheless, it's still bad.

I mean I wasn't really commenting on the frequency each point comes up. I was just trying to cover all bases about how dumb this story, Donna Brazille and people's reaction to it are. I rather cover all arguments people are making rather than have to answer to those later if someone comes back with them. Just the way I view debates.

I am disapproving of Brazile. I'm not disapproving of Clinton. The only thing she did wrong here was not revealing Brazile gave her these. I understand why she didn't, however, and if I was in her position I wouldn't have either. She spent nearly three decades taking withering unsubstantiated attacks from Republicans. Anyone would go inward after that and exercise an abundance of caution. Everyone knows those questions would have come up, and it wasn't worth giving the other side more ammo and optics victories. In the end she won, and the importance of these questions were null anyway. I rather that be the case and she takes heat about it afterwards.

Just like I argued in the FBI Comey thread, as a separate argument entirely, I rather we get our Senate and Supreme Court nominations and improve the lives of millions and worry about how "dirty" we got to get there. As long as nothing illegal was done, of course. And nothing illegal was done.

You can raise issues without being a prick about it though. Why would anyone want to have discussion with you when you constantly revert to being overly aggressive and an asshole? Let's not act like you don't have a history of this behavior.

I voted Hillary already, so I don't really have a platform to argue with you against. I just can't stand reading your posts because you represent one of the worst kind of forum posters especially when it comes to politics. Calm down man.

I am very calm, not that my emotional state should matter here. People think that because someone types passionately and with fury at how ridiculous people act that they are somehow emotionally impacted irl. Secret: I'm not. I laugh at most of the reactions because people cannot separate their personal views from how they view themselves. Impassioned and venomous attacks on positions are automatically viewed as being a prick and being mean to people.

You deal with politics the way you want to. The stakes are simply too high to be gentle with ridiculous beliefs and low information voters. Ignorance is no longer an excuse for being justified in defense of things like "Bernie Sanders would have won otherwise" and "I'm voting Trump because they are both equally bad!"

You may want to accept that behavior, but I prefer to call people out. Let them defend their positions. If they don't want to, they can skip the posts. I am not demanding anyone engage with me. And yet plenty still do. So can they make the decision about whether they can respond to the vitriolic rhetoric without your concern trolling about my cursing? Are we in second grade where gasp he said the "F" word?

 

[droggg]

Who told her this was a good idea? Jesus, talk about being tone deaf.

This is absolutely infuriating....

 

[Netherscourge]

Donna Brazile is an idiot. She practically admits she wants Hilary to win at all costs, even if it means taking advantage of her association with a news channel and the debate production itself.

If anything, she's damaged her candidate-of-choice with this.

It reinforces the notion of Hillary being a conniving manipulator and plays right into the hands of Trump and his cohorts.

 

[Adam_Vania]

its appalling how crooked this election shit is but the worse thing is people defending it bc their nominee must win at all costs.

this is what happens when the establishment always gets its way, it gets lazy, it starts making mistakes. this is addict behavior.

good luck to them trying to force this election. maybe it will work!

 

[Prologue]

Donna Brazile is an idiot. She practically admits she wants Hilary to win at all costs, even if it means taking advantage of her association with a news channel and the debate production itself.

If anything, she's damaged her candidate-of-choice with this.

It reinforces the notion of Hillary being a conniving manipulator and plays right into the hands of Trump and his cohorts.

well, she did accept the help.

 

[Amir0x]

its appalling how crooked this election shit is but the worse thing is people defending it bc their nominee must win at all costs.

this is what happens when the establishment always gets its way, it gets lazy, it starts making mistakes. this is addict behavior.

good luck to them trying to force this election. maybe it will work!

Oh make no mistake, we are going to win this election. There is no confusion about that. The only question is whether we will win the Senate or not.

well, she did accept the help.

Did she? Where did you see Hillary accepting the help? Like all we see is that her email didn't automatically reject Brazile's email because, like, why would it?

 

[Downhome]

She lied


Fucking idiot imo. But Corey needs to go as well.

Just to be clear, I was being beyond sarcastic in my earlier reply, haha.

 

[Cesare Borgia]

Who told her this was a good idea? Jesus, talk about being tone deaf.

lol. They really don't give a fuck.

Thank god for Trump because otherwise we'd be talking about being down 2-3 to Kasich/Rubio/etc.

 

[diablos991]

Who told her this was a good idea? Jesus, talk about being tone deaf.

She needs to resign from anything related to politics or ethics immediately.

I hope future candidates see this behavior and ensure Donna is nowhere near their election teams.

 

[Netherscourge]

Everything is fucking rigged.

Debates, voting, polls...

Nothing is legit anymore.

I hate this election so much.

I feel disgusted that I have to vote for someone next Tuesday that I despise slightly less then their opponent.

It's not about who's better for the job. Its about who's less-depraved.

 

[AnotherDayAnotherDollar]

This and more email leakage and the fact that Clinton is crooked as fuck made me decide to not vote this election. Either that or write in some random name for President and vote on the issues. I'm pretty firm with my decision. Two horrible, mischievous candidates.

 

[Amir0x]

Everything is fucking rigged.

Debates, voting, polls...

Nothing is legit anymore.

I hate this election so much.

I feel disgusted that I have to vote for someone next Tuesday that I despise slightly less then their opponent.

See a relatively stupid decision from Donna Brazile which had no impact on any election morphs into the optics shattering nonsense of "Everything is rigged."

And this is why it is important to come at this shit hard. Pussyfooting around gets nothing accomplished.

 

[Debirudog]

Everything is fucking rigged.

Debates, voting, polls...

Nothing is legit anymore.

I hate this election so much.

I feel disgusted that I have to vote for someone next Tuesday that I despise slightly less then their opponent.

It's not about who's better for the job. Its about who's less-depraved.

Poor baby...

 

[Amir0x]

This and more email leakage and the fact that Clinton is crooked as fuck made me decide to not vote this election. Either that or write in some random name for President and vote on the issues. I'm pretty firm with my decision. Two horrible, mischievous candidates.

Justify this opinion. Name three things -->HILLARY SPECIFICALLY DID<-- that you have evidence for that proves her corruption.

 

[diablos991]

See a relatively stupid decision from Donna Brazile which had no impact on any election morphs into the optics shattering nonsense of "Everything is rigged."

And this is why it is important to come at this shit hard. Pussyfooting around gets nothing accomplished.

We're all still waiting for that honorary position on the Clinton campaign ala what happened to Debbie when her corruption came out.

 

[Amir0x]

We're all still waiting for that honorary position on the Clinton campaign ala what happened to Debbie when her corruption came out.

Mm hmm. Not corruption, not illegal, she gave DWS no power and gave her the ability to step out of the way without causing harm to the party. Have you even heard a peep out of DWS since she stepped down? In any capacity officially related to the Clinton campaign? Hardly ever. Because she has no power now.

Donna Brazile ain't gonna get shit but the same at best.

 

[diablos991]

Mm hmm. Not corruption, not illegal, she gave DWS no power and gave her the ability to step out of the way without causing harm to the party.

Donna Brazile ain't gonna get shit but the same at best.

Come on. Debbie should have been ousted straight up. No honorary Clinton campaign position needed. Just as Donna should be.

The fact that move was even made speaks volumes about the kind of campaign Clinton runs.


Let's not forget he kind words that went along with that position:
https://www.hillaryclinton.com/brie...nal-committee-chair-debbie-wasserman-schultz/
“I want to thank my longtime friend Debbie Wasserman Schultz for her leadership of the Democratic National Committee over the past five years. I am grateful to Debbie for getting the Democratic Party to this year’s historic convention in Philadelphia, and I know that this week’s events will be a success thanks to her hard work and leadership. There’s simply no one better at taking the fight to the Republicans than Debbie–which is why I am glad that she has agreed to serve as honorary chair of my campaign’s 50-state program to gain ground and elect Democrats in every part of the country, and will continue to serve as a surrogate for my campaign nationally, in Florida, and in other key states. I look forward to campaigning with Debbie in Florida and helping her in her re-election bid–because as President, I will need fighters like Debbie in Congress who are ready on day one to get to work for the American people.”


Maybe Clinton will help Donna get a new job? Gotta repay those favors somehow.

 

[TheLostBigBoss]

Come on. Debbie should have been ousted straight up. No honorary Clinton campaign position needed. Just as Donna should be.

The fact that move was even made speaks volumes about the kind of campaign Clinton runs.


Let's not forget he kind words that went along with that position:
https://www.hillaryclinton.com/brie...nal-committee-chair-debbie-wasserman-schultz/
“I want to thank my longtime friend Debbie Wasserman Schultz for her leadership of the Democratic National Committee over the past five years. I am grateful to Debbie for getting the Democratic Party to this year’s historic convention in Philadelphia, and I know that this week’s events will be a success thanks to her hard work and leadership. There’s simply no one better at taking the fight to the Republicans than Debbie–which is why I am glad that she has agreed to serve as honorary chair of my campaign’s 50-state program to gain ground and elect Democrats in every part of the country, and will continue to serve as a surrogate for my campaign nationally, in Florida, and in other key states. I look forward to campaigning with Debbie in Florida and helping her in her re-election bid–because as President, I will need fighters like Debbie in Congress who are ready on day one to get to work for the American people.”

Stop being obtuse just to be obtuse.

 

[Amir0x]

Come on. Debbie should have been ousted straight up. No honorary Clinton campaign position needed. Just as Donna should be.

The fact that move was even made speaks volumes about the kind of campaign Clinton runs.

She wasn't going to step down without it. She would have caused a huge ruckus right between the DNC, when she was set to chair it!

This is why some people make good politicians and others don't. If you have no capacity to play the game and are willing to hurt yourself simply in favor to blind idealism, you're always going to lose. Maybe you think being a rarefied angel is worth always losing, but in this case Clinton played the best hand politically. Get DWS to leave quietly and so she can have some shred of dignity so she doesn't make hay, have a sound and awesome DNC (which she did), and ensure she has no power (which she also did).

In actual substance, everyone got what they wanted.

 

[AnotherDayAnotherDollar]

Justify this opinion. Name three things -->HILLARY SPECIFICALLY DID<-- that you have evidence for that proves her corruption.

I don't have to justify shit to you.

And, of course, you would want indisputable evidence that she is crooked and corrupt, for which there is none AFAIK. It's like me asking you to prove - with evidence - that Donald Trump is a racist. You probably don't have indisputable evidence, but we all know the truth.

 

[EatinOlives]

I don't have to justify shit to you.

And, of course, you would want indisputable evidence that she is crooked and corrupt, for which there is none AFAIK. It's like me asking you to prove - with evidence - that Donald Trump is a racist. You probably don't have indisputable evidence, but we all know the truth.

We actually do.

But it goes to show how I'll-informed you are

 

[Amir0x]

I don't have to justify shit to you.

And, of course, you would want indisputable evidence that she is crooked and corrupt, for which there is none AFAIK. It's like me asking you to prove - with evidence - that Donald Trump is a racist. You probably don't have indisputable evidence, but we all know the truth.

No you don't have to justify shit, and I didn't say you did. But if you don't, everyone gets to call you a low information know nothing incapable of putting together coherent defenses of your absurd positions. As long as you are OK with that, then we good bro. I'm not the one basking in ignorance and being proud of it. This is, however, a discussion forum, and when you post your views people get to call you out for them. Welcome to the real world.

And we have literally endless pieces of hard evidence of Donald Trump's racism. You are so cute though lol

 

[tuxfool]

I don't have to justify shit to you.

And, of course, you would want indisputable evidence that she is crooked and corrupt, for which there is none AFAIK. It's like me asking you to prove - with evidence - that Donald Trump is a racist. You probably don't have indisputable evidence, but we all know the truth.

The statements he makes on a daily basis?

(among a ton of other evidence)

 

[d1rtn4p]

Already voted for Clinton, but I felt abused this election as I had to pick between the lesser of two evils. I don't trust Hillary as far as I could throw her.

 

[Amir0x]

The statements he makes on a daily basis?

(among a ton of other evidence)

I mean even before this campaign he was sued for housing discrimination.

 

[PBY]

Gross, so unethical and its so frustrating consider how unnecessary any of this is.

 

[TheLostBigBoss]

I don't have to justify shit to you.

And, of course, you would want indisputable evidence that she is crooked and corrupt, for which there is none AFAIK. It's like me asking you to prove - with evidence - that Donald Trump is a racist. You probably don't have indisputable evidence, but we all know the truth.

We have threads and lists of articles showing Trump being a racist either with his housing discrimination, or his constant comments on the campaign trail.

Try harder.

 

[RPGCrazied]

Already voted for Clinton, but I felt abused this election as I had to pick between the lesser of two evils. I don't trust Hillary as far as I could throw her.

Yeah. I was for Bernie at first, voted for him in Texas. But I had to vote for Hillary now. Trump is that bad, and would be able to pick alt right supreme court judges. That right there is enough to scare me to go vote for her.

 

[cheezcake]

I mean I wasn't really commenting on the frequency each point comes up. I was just trying to cover all bases about how dumb this story, Donna Brazille and people's reaction to it are. I rather cover all arguments people are making rather than have to answer to those later if someone comes back with them. Just the way I view debates.

I still don't get what you think is dumb about this story, yes some crazies interpret it in crazy ways that lead to crazy arguments, but it sheds light on unethical behaviour undertaken by the campaign of a presidential candidate and the current DNC chair. That seems like pretty important news to me.

I am disapproving of Brazile. I'm not disapproving of Clinton. The only thing she did wrong here was not revealing Brazile gave her these. I understand why she didn't, however, and if I was in her position I wouldn't have either. She spent nearly three decades taking withering unsubstantiated attacks from Republicans. Anyone would go inward after that and exercise an abundance of caution. Everyone knows those questions would have come up, and it wasn't worth giving the other side more ammo and optics victories. In the end she won, and the importance of these questions were null anyway. I rather that be the case and she takes heat about it afterwards.

Just like I argued in the FBI Comey thread, as a separate argument entirely, I rather we get our Senate and Supreme Court nominations and improve the lives of millions and worry about how "dirty" we got to get there. As long as nothing illegal was done, of course. And nothing illegal was done.

Im not going to criticise Clinton directly for this matter either because it's difficult to tell whether she had any knowledge of the source of this information. But Podesta definitely did and he didn't disclose to the debate commission that someone was obtaining and giving the Clinton campaign access to debate questions before the debate took place which, as Stump pointed out, isn't without precedent. I don't know how you could see this as anything but unethical behaviour that is certainly worth reporting to the public. Any rationalisations for why the campaign chose not to disclose this info, optics victories or whatever, doesn't have any bearing on the fact that the story is worth telling.

I also can't agree with your "if nothing illegal" was done attitude. The law is nothing more than an imperfect attempt to codify ethics and morality. There are plenty of things which are illegal without really being unethical. Similarly there are plenty of things which are unethical without being illegal. No point considering something from someone elses interpretation of an issue that may not have even required writing laws about when you can just consider the ethics of an issue yourself.

 

[Amir0x]

Yeah. I was for Bernie at first, voted for him in Texas. But I had to vote for Hillary now. Trump is that bad, and would be able to pick alt right supreme court judges. That right there is enough to scare me to go vote for her.

I'm hopeful that just like every other job she has had, once people see her at work - and she is a lot better working than actually campaigning - her approval ratings will shoot up as always and people will realize she wasn't actually the corrupt demon people made her out to be.

 

[perfectchaos007]

Lets just write in Obama for a 3rd term. 22nd amendment needs to be repealed just this one time only

 

[Debirudog]

I don't have to justify shit to you.

And, of course, you would want indisputable evidence that she is crooked and corrupt, for which there is none AFAIK. It's like me asking you to prove - with evidence - that Donald Trump is a racist. You probably don't have indisputable evidence, but we all know the truth.

Trump's comments themselves are racist as shit, and then there's Central Park 5, denying housing to black people etc, and essentially thinking mexicans are rapists and drug dealers. He has not apologized or owned up to his hateful rhetoric.

People like you always like to ignore the evidence because you don't have jack on Clinton. Baseless conjecture everywhere but no actual meat at all.

 

[cheezcake]

I don't have to justify shit to you.

And, of course, you would want indisputable evidence that she is crooked and corrupt, for which there is none AFAIK. It's like me asking you to prove - with evidence - that Donald Trump is a racist. You probably don't have indisputable evidence, but we all know the truth.

The difference being that people can, and have, produced pages and pages of hard proof that Trump is racist.

 

[Amir0x]

I still don't get what you think is dumb about this story, yes some crazies interpret it in crazy ways that lead to crazy arguments, but it sheds light on unethical behaviour undertaken by the campaign of a presidential candidate and the current DNC chair. That seems like pretty important news to me.

I mean there's no actual there there to this story except in the fact that Donna Brazile is dumb and Podesta didn't report it. No evidence Hillary used this knowledge to her advantage, no evidence she even got these questions. No evidence of anything except Donna Brazile is a terrible politician who thought the risk of sending these obvious questions was worth a damn.

That is a story and it should be reported. But I feel it is a stupid story because it has so little actual impact on anything: the election or the primary or anything.

Im not going to criticise Clinton directly for this matter either because it's difficult to tell whether she had any knowledge of the source of this information. But Podesta definitely did and he didn't disclose to the debate commission that someone was obtaining and giving the Clinton campaign access to debate questions before the debate took place which, as Stump pointed out, isn't without precedent. I don't know how you could see this as anything but unethical behaviour that is certainly worth reporting to the public. Any rationalisations for why the campaign chose not to disclose this info, optics victories or whatever, doesn't have any bearing on the fact that the story is worth telling.

This is not a point I think I have major hard disagreement with. I disagree philosophically because of how I interpret the level of fair scrutiny to Hillary. I do not, based on the way reporting has been done this season, trust the news to properly report a story like this. Therefore, I agree with Hillary's decision to be quiet. I think the positives she would have got from being ethically sound would have been nullified by the negatives of the optics of this story. I mean Hillary is a uniquely unfairly treated politician and always has been. And putting on my politician hat, I believe I would have made the same decision. Were it another candidate I may not have. But Hillary has to walk on egg shells.

I also can't agree with your "if nothing illegal" was done attitude. The law is nothing more than an imperfect attempt to codify ethics and morality. There are plenty of things which are illegal without really being unethical. Similarly there are plenty of things which are unethical without being illegal. No point considering something from someone elses interpretation of an issue that may not have even required writing laws about when you can just consider the ethics of an issue yourself.

I don't believe in unilaterally disarming. If for example the Republicans had a strategy where throwing out nothing but lies was actually working to destroy a Democratic candidate, I'd be in favor of hitting back worse. Why? Because real lives will be destroyed if we don't get the Supreme Court. And I personally don't think how clean I look is more valuable than that fact. And I don't merely believe this is a matter of two equally respectable positions. We know the incalculable damage Republican policies and obstructionism has done. And I'm willing to play unfair, within the legal bounds, in order to destroy them for it.

And at the end of the day when LGBT rights are being expanded and voters rights are being saved and abortion is preserved we can argue about how muddy a person got afterwards. But given how history has always been written, people remember the sum totality of your best actions, not the dirt every president ever has had to occasionally wade into in order to win.

I think at the very least however you view ethics and its flexibility, you can agree that every single President has at one time or another been questionable ethically. It is almost impossible not to get muddy in politics.

 

[freenudemacusers]

really sad to see another era of Clinton corruption is nearly at hand.

 

[TestOfTide]

I thought this was the democratic process? That everyone can choose who they best believe represents them?

If we're just going to say you can only vote for two established parties, and them limit it down to telling all (X) people are required to vote (Y), you'd be better off just removing the middleman.

I'll be using my vote to represent a disinterest in the two-party system, it's not like I'm going to cause any one candidate to win anyways.

So then why are you voting in the first place if you don't want to actually vote for a winnable candidate?

Not just that, but the non-major party options are just as bad as Trump. McMuffin is a social conservative twat, Johnson is an idiot who knows nothing about foreign policy, and Stein is a green deplorable dipshit who peddles in just as much bullshit conspiracy crap as Trump does.

Yes naturally. This wasn't the only question leaked to her. Sure the Flint Michigan question was obviously going to be asked, the question about the death penalty -- less likely so. I'm also not entirely sure what the extent of the questions she knew ahead of time were, but it seems really odd to me in a case about how at least some questions were known to her campaign ahead of time, a prime defense was that she was overprepared. Isn't that kind of like being caught cheating and defending yourself with "well I did well on the test".

Oh man, I'm sure there's NO reason to believe Clinton would have still been prepared for a death penalty question.

I mean it's not like we have seen her partake I numerous debates before the 2015/16 election season, right?

Seriously, you sound ridiculous. Hillary performed the same as she always does during debates: incredibly well and prepared.

And your analogy is shit. This would be more if student that was already getting straight As before happened to hear from a gossiper "pssst, I heard the pre all test is gonna have questions on logarithms and quadratic equations". That's not curveball shit. That's shit that any decent student would have already prepared for.

 

[Bowler]

I'm hopeful that just like every other job she has had, once people see her at work - and she is a lot better working than actually campaigning - her approval ratings will shoot up as always and people will realize she wasn't actually the corrupt demon people made her out to be.

Apparently you don't live in NY

 

[AnotherDayAnotherDollar]

We actually do.

But it goes to show how I'll-informed you are

Being sued for something doesn't prove being guilty. The house discrimination lawsuit - if that's what you're referring to - was settled without any prove that Trump was wrong IIRC. If you are talking about "mexicans being rapists" or "mexican Judge" then that's not really evidence, just like the "superpredators" and being backed by for profit prisons is either.

No you don't have to justify shit, and I didn't say you did. But if you don't, everyone gets to call you a low information know nothing incapable of putting together coherent defenses of your absurd positions. As long as you are OK with that, then we good bro. I'm not the one basking in ignorance and being proud of it. This is, however, a discussion forum, and when you post your views people get to call you out for them. Welcome to the real world.

And we have literally endless pieces of hard evidence of Donald Trump's racism. You are so cute though lol

Your demeaning, self-righteous tone is annoying lol

I am very well informed and Clinton is a crooked, corrupt individual who just happens to be a tad better than Trump, but feel free to ride off on your high horse thinking you are so well informed, "bro".

 

[KingK]

Bernie screwed himself by not campaigning in the south

Why not both? I sincerely doubt Bernie had a real chance at the nomination regardless, but it is also true that the DNC clearly had a preferred candidate and acted, in mostly minor ways, to tip the scale in her favor. It's not the worst scandal in the world and it isn't going to make me vote republican or some shit, but it's still pretty disappointing. And is just another instance of this election being consumed by stupid, avoidable scandal instead of policy.

Also, looking at all the whataboutisms on the first few pages...I can't wait for this election to be over. A lot of people I normally agree with are in full partisan blinders mode and cannot easily accept criticisms of democrats or Clinton. And despite nominating an openly fascist white nationalist for president, the republicans are definitely keeping the house and probably the Senate. This has easily been the most disheartening and depressing election season since I started following politics in 07/08.

Being sued for something doesn't prove being guilty. The house discrimination lawsuit - if that's what you're referring to - was settled without any prove that Trump was wrong IIRC.

Gee, who would've guessed it would be easy to get away with discrimination in the seventies!? It was settled without admission of wrongdoing, but there was plenty of damming evidence. Trump is a racist.

 

[Amir0x]

really sad to see another era of Clinton corruption is nearly at hand.

Who are you voting for freenudemacusers? I mean, if you're so against corruption. I'm assuming your avatar may not actually show your political views, so I'll let you tell me.

I am very well informed and Clinton is a crooked, corrupt individual who just happens to be a tad better than Trump, but feel free to ride off on your high horse thinking you are so well informed, "bro".

So well informed, yet no evidence. So well informed, yet she is a 'tad better than Trump'.


Don't worry, my high horse is fucking tall as shit. And it's standing on a hill.

 

[TheLostBigBoss]

I would be more angry/disappointed in the DNC if Bernie didn't make them out to be a target day one, branding them "the establishment" that is the cause of our current political issues and lack of progress.

Instead of getting an entire coalition of apathetic young people to become politically active and become a new wave of reliable voters who will actually vote on off years, he spent the last half of the campaign poisoning the well and turning his group of potential dem voters right back into politically apathetic people who will vote for Johnson or what ever (and even a smaller portion of them into a cult of personality)

At that point, I don't blame the DNC for wanting his ass gone, I wanted his ass gone, he wasn't a democrat (and isn't a democrat) and I don't blame the party for seeing what he is doing and going "We need to shut this asshole down yesterday".

Doesn't excuse something like this, but when Russia hacks DNC servers and shock, people at the DNC don't fucking like Sanders, well I don't know what you were expecting.

 

[dave is ok]

I'm hopeful that just like every other job she has had, once people see her at work - and she is a lot better working than actually campaigning - her approval ratings will shoot up as always and people will realize she wasn't actually the corrupt demon people made her out to be.

I truly hope this is the case and you won't have to edit this post a few years from now.

 

[freenudemacusers]

Who are you voting for freenudemacusers? I mean, if you're so against corruption. I'm assuming your avatar may not actually show your political views, so I'll let you tell me.

First that's personal, and second as this thread proves, there is a lot of underhanded business at play to prevent anyone but the preordained candidate from winning in the first place. And the end of the day I'm just another disenfranchised voter.