2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumHillary should hold more press conferences.
She has a trust deficit and the opinion that she isn't transparent and is too "closed off", is widespread. Yes, she held one recently; the first of 2016. Yes, she's running ahead of Trump. But I believe holding a couple of press conferences in the fall could help her address the likability, trust and transparency issues.
Even winning, no President wants to enter office with a majority thinking that the new President isn't trustworthy or transparent. Not Trump isn't a way to start off.
Speak directly to the American people. Yes, she'd get annoying questions, but she can deal with those. I think the upside to holding a couple of press conferences is greater than the downside.
Note: Alert if you wish, but this is what is known as constructive criticism. And Skinner has expressly allowed that.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
FSogol
(45,473 posts)
cali
(114,904 posts)free.
It's still ridiculous horseshit.
Demsrule86
(68,543 posts)It is using a right wing meme to ding Hillary. Those who don't trust her because of the years of rightie attacks won't...and no press conference will fix that.
R B Garr
(16,950 posts)to lower her poll numbers. It's a RW talking point.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)Hillary Clinton is doing amazingly well. Strangely, magically well if what the media keep reporting is so correct. I'm surprised you don't realize this.
Maybe you're missing the same strong dissonance between her real-life performance and the picture the MSM keep projecting that is escaping so many others?
As you should recall, the media were ALL surprised when the nation reacted to the unending chain of Clinton scandals in the 1990s, reported every day in the news, culminating in an impeachment attempt, by tossing a pack of Republicans out of office. Perhaps you were surprised then too? And now it's happening again--media covering scandals every day without fail through her entire campaign.
If it's not to be deja vu all over again, I'd rethink that powerful, crippling "distrust" meme you've apparently swallowed and are pushing here. In spite of questions being inserted on every poll so they can be reported continuously until the next poll provides more, pushing this meme just isn't doing its job. Either liberals are rejecting her in large numbers or there is, again, something wrong with this picture...!
In any case, in spite of a deeply divided electorate, in spite of being the first woman candidate for President of the United States, in spite of hundreds of millions of dollars spent in attempt to swiftboat her, in spite of petrified media bias against her:
Hillary Clinton is running for president with enormous support from her party, her admirers and colleagues in politics, and her electorate (over 88% Dems right now, and some of us are conservatives). And she's winning.
And she'd almost certainly win with a better GOP candidate too. It'd be closer, but demographic changes are killing the white man's party and people all across the spectrum are very unhappy with the GOP's performance.
cali
(114,904 posts)synergie
(1,901 posts)filters are a bit closer to your own eye and you're simply unaware of them or pleased with what they show you, despite not conforming with the reality that the rest of the world not influenced by RW talking points lives in?
NastyRiffraff
(12,448 posts)Yes, the media (and I suppose Cali) were surprised when the impeached Bill Clinton handily won a second term and that there was a Republican meltdown in Congress. And the media (and I suppose Cali) are surprised today that Hillary Clinton is leading by double digits in several swing states, after unrelenting attacks on bullshit issues.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)filtered through biased media definitely produce different pictures.
As said, filters distort reality. And it's not as if we don't all know that the MSM has been strongly biased for so long against Hillary that the bias itself is arthritic with age.
politicaljunkie41910
(3,335 posts)We don't want to be like Trump and the Repugs Party who make up their own facts.
NastyRiffraff
(12,448 posts)Thanks!
Demsrule86
(68,543 posts)and indicates what happens when the GOP goes to far.
Demsrule86
(68,543 posts)The Repubs lost big and New Gingrich resigned in fact ...a stunning electoral loss which was because of the impeachment ...or so exit polls said. So it is quite possible even if he was 'impeached' in his first term...he would not have lost the 96 election.
politicaljunkie41910
(3,335 posts)The point of my post was to correct the erroneous data in the post which you referenced, not to speculate about what might have happened in 1996 as you did. There is enough erroneous data put out by the fact-free Repug party and I didn't want an incorrect statement to go uncorrected, because his statement (albeit incorrect) was an important part of his conclusion. It wasn't personal, and the Poster I was addressing didn't seem to have a problem with what I said, but somehow you did. I assure you that I am as Democratic as anyone on this board. Don't mistake my lack of thousands of posts like many here have, fool you into thinking I'm a troll or something, or someone YOU need to correct. I can read, and don't need YOU to tell me what I should and shouldn't take away from someone else's posts.
Demsrule86
(68,543 posts)I had not even noticed the number of posts...I rarely do. The point was that we still won in 96...you said the scandal had not occurred in 96 which is correct...I merely pointed out that in 98, the GOP took an electoral beating and Gingrich needed to resign. My post was meant to be informative, not critical...hey that is true but what about this kind of post. Sorry if you are offended...not my intention.
Duckhunter935
(16,974 posts)Every so often. Every poll says this
UMTerp01
(1,048 posts)Its in the polls. You can't pick and choose what things you like in the polls and ignore the deficits.
highprincipleswork
(3,111 posts)synergie
(1,901 posts)what's being picked and chosen to create a distortion of her honesty, it requires that one actually does one's homework and not pick and choose the factual basis for these supposed deficits that are pushed by the media over decades.
Demsrule86
(68,543 posts)among Democrats, she is fine and with some Republicans, it seems she is fine also now based on polls.
Highway61
(2,568 posts)Oh come on...a very valid point is being made here. She needs to "get out there" and discuss issues... make herself visible to those who don't really know her. There are a LOT of republicans out there who probably don't know who to vote for under these extenuating circumstances. They are ripe for the picking if she reaches out.
FSogol
(45,473 posts)discussing issues. Look past the Trump circus and you might see that.
Highway61
(2,568 posts)Come on...No way!!! Cali has been here a long time and made a good point...you suggested the "right wing" rhetoric to the OP. We're suppose to all be on the same page here.
Demsrule86
(68,543 posts)More bad advice that would hurt Sec. Clinton.
More democrat politicians should do the same.
It's free advertising, also.
st17011864200074656
(190 posts)K.
glennward
(989 posts)Most voters are attention deficit...like Trump. She needs to do this mid-September when school is in and parents have returned to a regular routine. In the meantime, Trump is using up all his rope so I wouldn't step on it.
cali
(114,904 posts)
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)
I call it perpetuating the myth by repeating the lie. Shit like this reinforces RW talking points. I question the wisdom and motivation of such posts.
Stop it, please.
cali
(114,904 posts)Some of you are just so locked into denial that you can't see facts and so defensive that even the mildest CONSTRUCTIVE criticism of HRC is seen as "hate" or lying about Hillary or what the hell ever.
I will never stop anything because YOU ask it. Never.
Your opinion is simply one I do not hold in high esteem.
emoticon overuse is indicative of something- and it's not an argument. It's just silly.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)
cali
(114,904 posts)<snip>
In an NBC-Wall Street Journal poll in late June, 69 percent of respondents said they were concerned that Clinton has a record or reputation as untrustworthy. A CBS News poll in June found 62 percent saying Clinton is not honest and trustworthy, while 33 percent said she is. Her ratings on this were similar to Trump’s (63 percent not honest, 32 percent honest). But on a separate measure of being forthcoming, 33 percent of registered voters said Clinton says what she believes while 62 percent said she does not. By contrast, 56 percent said Trump says what he believes.
<snip>
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/can-hillary-clinton-overcome-her-trust-problem/2016/07/03/b12eeb52-3fd8-11e6-84e8-1580c7db5275_story.html
4 brutal poll numbers that greet Hillary Clinton at the Democratic National Convention
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/07/25/4-brutal-poll-numbers-that-greet-hillary-clinton-at-the-democratic-national-convention/
From Whitewater to Benghazi and her secret speeches to Wall Streeters, Hillary Clinton has a trust problem, polls find. She admitted Monday that she has to do more to change the perception. Political director Lisa Desjardins reports and Judy Woodruff talks with Anne Gearan of The Washington Post; Peter D. Hart, founder of Hart Research Associates; and longtime Clinton supporter Ann Lewis.
<snip>
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/can-hillary-clinton-convince-voters-that-shes-honest-and-trustworthy/
Why she has these FACTUAL problems vis a vis voter perception of her, can be debated. I'm sure you believe that it's all the republicans doing. I see things a bit more complexly and more realistically.
I understand that facts are uncomfortable for you if they don't fit into your frame, but facts they are.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)The primary is over. You need to stop.
cali
(114,904 posts)And no, you haven't a clue.
You're the one that went ballistic over my very mild op, nurse.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)Actually... you're the one making it personal with the insults.
"very mild op" ... yes, of course, it has to be, doesn't it?
Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)It's really appalling that, on the brave new DU, even a statement of obvious fact is dismissed as a right-wing meme if it's the slightest bit unfavorable to Clinton.
Let me not paint with too broad brush, though. There are people on this thread who recognize the problem, and who thoughtfully disagree with your suggestion as a matter of tactics. Some of the posts here exemplify the kind of valuable discussion that's become less common on DU.
On the merits, let me add another point in favor of your OP. Facing the media at press conferences would probably help Clinton's debate prep (assuming that Trump doesn't duck the debates).
KMOD
(7,906 posts)Hillary Clinton's debate prep. She is masterful at it.
cali
(114,904 posts)hopefully thoughtfully to their comments.
Perhaps we can get back to thoughtful discussions of issues after November. I've been trying- posting many issue oriented threads. They sink like stones.
thank you.
bonemachine
(757 posts)"can't be trusted" and "isn't trusted".
DURHAM D
(32,609 posts)
Demsrule86
(68,543 posts)I find nothing constructive about this post. Hillary is doing just fine. Why would she jump out and make herself a media target? Let Trump continue with his nonsense. When someone is melting down...let them.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)
sheshe2
(83,729 posts)Demsrule86
(68,543 posts)It should not be allowed.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)And that reminds me: there are a lot of things that I read here and elsewhere that would be better suited for JPR. But I guess their 12-person echo-chamber and incredibly slow software can only keep people entertained for so long, and that helps to explain the uptick in "concerned" posts or "helpful criticism" posts in recent days (throughout this site and elsewhere on the internet).
Demsrule86
(68,543 posts)
Curtland1015
(4,404 posts)Apparently, Trump's stonewalling of the press is so epic that it's overshadowing the Clinton camps sorta blackout.
By now, historically, any candidate would have a gaggle of press hovering around them 24/7, riding the bus with them, etc, etc.
Hillary's campaign has yet to okay that, and that's rare for how late it is in the campaign. But again, Trump is so much worse with it that many aren't taking notice.
THAT SAID, were I Clinton, I'd relish having any reason not to have a bunch of reporters stumbling all over me, never giving me an inch of rest or piece, clucking over every thing you say and every look you make.
There's no legal precedent for it, or moral one. It's just that the press has gotten used to a certain level of access it hasn't enjoyed yet. Which normally I'd say, "well, screw them." But they ARE a big part of influencing plenty of people out there, so it is something to consider, at least.
helpisontheway
(5,007 posts)First of all the media does not care what she has to say. They just want her to slip up. Plus she needs to figure out a straight answer to the stupid email questions. Seems like everyone else can provide a straight answer and that is the end of it. But she wants to parse words.
uponit7771
(90,335 posts)... doesn't even have to do that... just say something not as artful as they would such as the FBI found I was truthful.
23 day news cycle on just that while no one has demanded Comey explain his blaring contradiction between no emails headered classified and not having any classified emails.
Native
(5,939 posts)since their number one goal is ratings and they seem to do anything they can to inflate and massage information to push their agenda, I think Hillary's current strategy is the way to go.
Isn't the general rule to sit back while your candidate goes down in flames? Why take the media off of that shit storm?
Also, whenever she has done a press conference, what is it that's typically reported in the media? Only negatives or some comment taken out of context.
I personally feel that the people who have trust issues with Hillary won't be swayed to feel any differently if she does more press conferences. In fact, I think it will only feed into the current, albeit inaccurate, perception of distrust.
grossproffit
(5,591 posts)
still_one
(92,122 posts)President Obama is a Muslim, and 29% of all Americans believe that. It is because the MSM have allowed that garbage to go unchallenged. The Kerry Swift Boating is a perfect example of what has been going on for decades. 80% of the coverage was spent to those making the false charges, and much less time was given to the facts.
The school of accepted school of journalism is now the Chuck Todd School of Journalism, "it isn't the media's job to call out lies". He was discussing it in the context of the ACA when he said the following, "It's Not Media's Job To Correct GOP's Obamacare errors"
The media has been doing the same thing with Hillary. Major economic speech from Hillary yesterday, which included tuition free college, is mentioned only as a passing thought. She has been out on the campaign trail meeting with real people
Of course a portion of her time should be done through press conferences, but going out on the trail, and meeting personally with the people is much more important in order to get her known.
cali
(114,904 posts)Jaysus. It's just sad that the mildest, constructive criticism of HRC, is met with rabid responses.
still_one
(92,122 posts)jury ruling on this OP, and I voted that it did NOT violate the TOS, so your "mildest criticism" comment, is all wet, at least in regards to me, and in regard to my comment, my response was NOT a "rabid" response to your OP. Nice hyperbole though
I would also suspect there were others like me who were Hillary supporters in the primary on that jury, that also ruled it did not violate the TOS
On the first comment, you missed my entire point. The media has set up the false narrative, and whatever this medium spews out, whether false or not, much of the public regurgitates the same garbage
Polls are a reflections of the distortions of the media feeding the populace this garbage
I gave several examples, including the Kerry Swift Boating, and the President Obama is Muslim narrative.
90% of talk radio is right wing propaganda that gets spewed 24/7 throughout the airwaves, and the dirty little secret is that it does influence the public
It is a self-fulfilled prophecy. You spew a talking point out enough, and the public will willingly accept it.
This is not the first time in history where the media has been a partner in misinformation, the Joe McCarthy period was notorious for it.
It wasn't that long ago when the illustrious media was throwing out the, "Hillary is shrill memo" with one hand, and taking the "likability" polls with the other hand
It is the old loaded question, "When did you stop beating your wife"
Only because I am giving you a view that you disagree with regarding the false talking point that "Hillary isn't trust worthy", somehow my response is a rabid response?
It was nothing of the sort. Maybe you should focus on what I wrote, as you are telling people to focus on what was said in the OP. Touche'
and by the way, my comment did address your OP with the following:
"Of course a portion of her time should be done through press conferences, but going out on the trail, and meeting personally with the people is much more important in order to get her known."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=2360529
stopbush
(24,395 posts)
AgadorSparticus
(7,963 posts)NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)view of the situation than the typical viewer picks up, also reminders of facts to help you break away from the memes the media are pushing. I posted above, but you won't do better than to just re-read and consider the information Still One provides.
20 questions about emails, 10 asking why people don't like her and 5 about Benghazi. Thanks, but no.
La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)
Happens every time, and every time produces another "let's split hairs on her answer and say she lied" scandal.
I'm sick of the media constantly referring to Donald Trump as being "creative with the truth" while they almost always say "Hillary LIED."
ETA: Fortunately, the media has finally started to call Trump out, but only because they can't ignore the severity of his insane and absurd behavior.
joshcryer
(62,269 posts)She's terrible at live journalist inquiry. She's not a "people person" as it were. It shows throughout her career. Always avoiding the news media. It's perhaps her greatest weakness, and I suspect, she's being advised, correctly, that she should say or do nothing as Trump acts. Let Trump destroy himself. That's the current plan, imo.
cali
(114,904 posts)but I think she could perform adequately and maybe better than that. And I'm suggesting it not for the present, but for later in the fall.
Again, entering the WH with the kind of polling I cite in post 24, is not to her benefit.
And Presidents need to hold press conferences. They simply cannot shirk them.
President Obama held fewer in his first term than most of his predecessors, but they still numbered 74.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/politico44/2013/01/obama-ends-term-with-fewer-pressers-than-bush-or-clinton-154233
Demsrule86
(68,543 posts)I have no idea why you wish to say these things about our nominee and do not find it helpful in our effort to win a landslide election and maybe get the House which would allow much of what you all say you want Hillary to do...to have a chance to actually happen.
cali
(114,904 posts)I always hope to find people who are more interested in analysis than rah rah go team blue.
You?
Demsrule86
(68,543 posts)What purpose does it serve to critique Sec. Clinton? She needs to be supported not criticised. Obama was torn to shreds here after the election. And how did that help? We lost the House and ultimately the senate; we can't even get a judge confirmed at the moment. Had we supported Obama, it might have been different. Can't we at least wait until after the election to begin tearing down Sec. Clinton?
PDittie
(8,322 posts)the relationships with her donors:
Hillary Clinton has taken too much money from people with business before the government to dismiss concerns about conflicts of interest out of hand.
She's taken it in smaller sums from direct donors to her campaigns for Senate and president, much larger contributions to the party she now runs, eye-popping personal payments for speeches and astronomical gifts to the Clinton Foundation.
The public deserves to know how she plans to prevent all that money from unduly influencing her if she is elected president.
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/Opinion/2016/08/12/Hillary-Clinton-needs-to-explain-her-relationships-with-donors/8271470992642/
This is a a fair critique, yes? Jonathan Allen (author of OP) is no Trumper, having been frequently cited by Media Matters in defense of Clinton and the Benghazi "investigation" (sic).
It will be a debate question (hopefully, if it never becomes press conference question, that is).
lapucelle
(18,242 posts)I know..."let's demand explanations" has nothing to do with the fact that it's a female candidate.
In addition, small dollar donors sounds populist, but there's no telling who (or what robot) is pressing a "donate $20" multiple times everyday for hours or exactly where those "donors" live.
Trump took in a surprisingly big haul last month, mostly in small donor sums. t looks a bit fishy.
auntpurl
(4,311 posts)but in the meantime, she's standing well back so as to allow Trump to continue punching himself in the nuts.
Also, being out on the road talking to people is more effective than the "gotcha" session most media outlets will present her with. Remember, at the moment, the media is rolling around in the Trump meltdown story because even they can't spin a horserace out of these poll numbers. But they'd MUCH prefer a horserace because then EVERYONE is sick and anxious and watching the news 24/7. If they can tear her down, they will.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)If lack of accessibility decreases her chances of winning she should address it. If it isn't she shouldn't.
La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)Displaying ambition, once she holds a job people like her.
So far she is running a winning campaign so I wouldn't second guess her.
grossproffit
(5,591 posts)She should probably smile more too. You know, wouldn't want her to look too serious.
BeyondGeography
(39,369 posts)Their questions are not just designed to make her look bad, they are most often pointless.
Peacetrain
(22,875 posts)The press is desperate, just desperate to tear into her, because they have been forced to be truthful about Trump.. and so as not to seem lop sided.. they need to tear her apart..
She is doing just fine..You examine the ground around you before you walk into the minefields..
cali
(114,904 posts)
Kingofalldems
(38,444 posts)Looks like we could take over Congress as well.
This must really bug republicans.
MineralMan
(146,286 posts)Ya think?
She's been out speaking to the "American People" all along during this campaign season. Maybe she'll come to a location near you sometime.
But, you should send a copy of your OP to her campaign headquarters. They may not have thought about press conferences, somehow...
bluestateguy
(44,173 posts)I don't see the gain.
AgadorSparticus
(7,963 posts)You know why? Because she is going into office. That's all that matters. She is waaaay ahead. The only time you want to a dress your weakness is when you are behind or when the race is up for grabs. Why in the world would she want to go talk about her weakness if she is cruising for a landslide victory? Makes no sense.
Quite honestly, I personally feel this is a terrible idea. The American public does not need to be reminded of how they don't like her or trust her. She is doing EXACTLY what she needs to do to maintain her lead.
And most of that so-called untrust is for the simple fact that she is a woman. Once she is in office people will get over their ridiculous fear of her.
AgadorSparticus
(7,963 posts)She will be an amazing president. What people don't get is how she is loved around the world. I can't wait to see what she does in her time in office. I am so excited!
KMOD
(7,906 posts)She has spent her whole life accomplishing things. She's been the most respected woman in the world for decades. And yet there are still people who attempt to knock her down.
AgadorSparticus
(7,963 posts)beachbumbob
(9,263 posts)Would be to attack her to make this election close...she has plenty of people who can speak up for her
MineralMan
(146,286 posts)You dispense it freely and often. We all can remember your constructive criticism of President Obama throughout his two terms. At least those of us who have been here throughout that period can remember.
I'm sure you'll continue to constructively criticize Hillary Clinton equally often after the election. We'll be following your posts about her deficiencies on an almost daily basis, I'm sure.
TwilightZone
(25,457 posts)This is why I like you.
MineralMan
(146,286 posts)La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)ismnotwasm
(41,975 posts)Very skillfully too.
What the fuck are you talking about "press conferences"--about what? Emails? Benghazi? Trump? Her husband?
OnDoutside
(19,952 posts)necessary. If the race tightens, then maybe, but as it is things are ticking over nicely.
Let her surrogates keep prodding Trump for a reaction.
I'd love to see the campaign get to a stage where they can simmer the pressure on Trump, and ramp up the pressure on key House & Senate races.
Metric System
(6,048 posts)
displacedtexan
(15,696 posts)Have you ever actually worked on a campaign? When your opponent is withering from the blazing sun, you don't wish for rain.
BobbyDrake
(2,542 posts)Everything you recommend Clinton should do would actively hurt her campaign. Stop this petty effort to keep fighting the primary.
yardwork
(61,588 posts)DU is for electing Democrats. JPR is not. I see no common ground at all.
There are numerous vile threads on JPR calling Hillary names, some photoshopped with ugly images. The people who formed that community own it. Why are they here?
ismnotwasm
(41,975 posts)And no few think hate is a productive emotion.
Turin_C3PO
(13,954 posts)never participated in the hatred bs over there at JPR. As far as what I saw over there, they accused her of being a Hillary agent. Criticisms of Clinton are still allowed here as long as it's not a RW smear and comes from a place of genuineness.
Demsrule86
(68,543 posts)eliminated from the rules. Allowable and wise are two different things, however. I guess I will merely block any who engage in this practice as I strongly disapprove. I want to encourage the electorate you see and win big in November. I am a lifelong committed Democrat who would love to see a strong progressive agenda actually enacted. You see words matter. I am part of the get out the vote effort most election years and have found that criticism from the left is very demoralizing to Democratic voters...people expect the right to say awful things...but when it comes from the left, it is a more meaningful and effective criticism. Thus, there is no such thing as constructive criticism during a presidential campaign or any other election for that matter.
Turin_C3PO
(13,954 posts)due to wing nut attacks on her that have been so vile. I'm of a mind, same as you, that during the election, I stay 100% positive.
But I do know that some of those who do criticize the minutiae of the campaign do so with innocent motives. Some people just want to discuss strategy and such. I'm sure they know that they have no effect on her strategy obviously. There are certainly concern trolls here, and some are obvious. But not everyone engaged in criticism is.
Demsrule86
(68,543 posts)It should not be allowed. The concern trolls are taking advantage of the Democratic site. Some of them (not the OP) have publicly stated they want Hillary Clinton to lose the election on other sites. I want a landslide...let's take back the Congress and get stuff done.Criticism by the left demoralises voters. I never criticise Pres. Obama. I don't agree with him on some issues but the right attack him non-stop...we need to have his back. If I have a concern I write, leave a comment or email.
Demsrule86
(68,543 posts)People Obama has been a wonderful president and we are lucky to have had him. I love him and the first family...worked on both his campaigns. He will be missed.
cali
(114,904 posts)same way as I'm being attacked in this thread.
yardwork
(61,588 posts)Look, I don't care where people post. I'm a member of DU, though, and DU is reserved for people who support Democrats.
cali
(114,904 posts)try reading.
betsuni
(25,456 posts)NanceGreggs
(27,813 posts)... because JPR is a shitty site, full stop.
It is full of totally ludicrous conspiracy theories, "political analysis" spewed by idiots who have NO idea whatsoever of how gov't works, and endless threads about how HRC and her "Oligarch Henchmen" have been threatening Bernie and his family in between murdering Clinton opponents.
The hatred runs so thick, even Bernie himself has been thrown under the bus by many JPR members, and the paranoia runs so wild, there isn't a Democrat, a journalist, a news source, a blogger, a broadcaster, or an author who hasn't been labelled as "the enemy" if they express anything positive about Hillary or the Dem Party.
Those who signed-up at JPR thinking they would be engaging in intelligent discussion with fellow "progressives" have now realized that JPR touts more RW talking points than the RNC, FOX-News and Freeperville combined, and those who became members in hopes of actively furthering Bernie's ideals have been disappointed to find little interest in doing so.
JPR is the internet version of Jonestown. Those who refuse to drink the election was stolen, and we're all going to be 'disappeared' for saying so Kool-Aid are desperate to leave the compound before they wind up brain-dead from exposure to the constant lunacy.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)Excellent! Nicely done! Those are excellent observations!
Sad, but true.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)And why it passes jury scrutiny, I'll never understand.
Demsrule86
(68,543 posts)How you can want to help someone like Trump...I just don't understand. He is the worst GOP candidate in my lifetime.
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)Demsrule86
(68,543 posts)
Cary
(11,746 posts)Cary
(11,746 posts)MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)
Loki
(3,825 posts)She is out speaking every day to people, real people and the press is covering her, but we get to to listen to the Cheeto Express daily, almost hourly on our so-called "news" channels. Perhaps we should ask for more coverage of her rather than the out of control egoist. The old adage is appropriate here, when someone is digging themselves into a hole, stay out of their way. I think the first debate will give people a very stark visual into what the choice is, and it will be devastating. The false narrative which has been ongoing for over 20 years is a manufactured smear campaign and some people are going to believe it no matter if she came out and walked on water. I know exactly what has been going on since Karl Rove came out of diapers. Some people will believe anything as long as it fits into their preconceived ideology. Truth will out and it will either be enough or it won't. I believe her actions will prove her to be honest and capable.
kimbutgar
(21,126 posts)andym
(5,443 posts)Not sure that press conferences are the best way to restore her trustworthiness in the polls, which was quite good in the years just before the Benghazi and email investigations. Years of political slander as the fallout from these investigations, and speculation from media pundits, have their effect, and it will just take time to undo.
I think very vocal support from people who are seen as squeaky clean and beyond reproach will help somewhat, not only politicians but clergymen, judges, law enforcement etc. I do think that perceived trustworthiness is the key aspect holding her back from 55 to 60% in the polls. It's pretty difficult to clear oneself in the public eye, so press conferences are of limited utility. It really helps to have others stand up and provide a testimonial by putting their good name on the line.
NastyRiffraff
(12,448 posts)In case you missed it, that's 
Buh bye! 
Rex
(65,616 posts)As far as trust goes, Trump is losing voters left and right because of trust issues. I personally don't think he means to do this, he just cannot help himself so high on cocaine.
Nobody believes Obama and HRC created ISIS, that is just stupid beyond explanation. Trump cannot keep his lying mouth shut, he is pathological.
HRC can just sit back and watch him self destruct, he is working hard on it.
That doesn't mean I wouldn't like to hear from her more, just that the trust issue is not a major problem for her. Right now it is sympathetic with the Russians trying to interfere in our elections.
People don't take kindly to that shit. It is one of the things that unifies us imo.
ForgoTheConsequence
(4,868 posts)It's free publicity.
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)
pnwmom
(108,974 posts)And Rethugs have held countless investigations against her, starting with Travelgate, Christmas-card-gate, and on and on and on.
It wouldn't matter how many press conferences she had. That she can't be trusted would still be the Rethugs' claim, and that of the people carrying water for them.
SixString
(1,057 posts)...on this press conference thing.
Funny.
