2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumIs it time to give up on Hillary?
When it comes to issues I am with her most of the time. But I'm about to give up.
I'm still holding out hope but this email thing just gets worse and worse. Why weren't there people at the State Dept. Making sure all of this was done correctly?
This whole thing makes me sad. She is the best when it comes to women's issues. Buy holy cow.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
HassleCat
(6,409 posts)Of course, the Republicans will try to drag this out so it lasts until the primary elections, and until next November if necessary. Even so, we should know in a few weeks how serious the "email thing" is going to be. It could be another Benghazi, nothing of any real concern, but enough to supply Trey Gowdy with an endless stream of nonsense questions.
ibegurpard
(17,081 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Logical
(22,457 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)
DURHAM D
(33,053 posts)But, go ahead and give up if you need to because she will get your back even if you won't get hers. She is not a quitter.
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)She is clearly one of them.
left-of-center2012
(34,195 posts)
smiley
(1,432 posts)the GOP will play this video non-stop and will guarantee a democrat loss. IMO of course, but I certainly have never trusted her and seeing this video for the first time doesn't help that impression.
Proud Liberal Dem
(24,951 posts)Which clown? 
smiley
(1,432 posts)I don't think it will matter. The right will show up in droves to the polls just to vote against her.
Proud Liberal Dem
(24,951 posts)We will show up in droves to vote against the Republican clownwreck (and, in some cases, actually for our nominee)
smiley
(1,432 posts)we do also. But I also hope that nominee is Bernie Sanders. I would have a hard casting my vote for HRC, but I'm allowed to say that since I'm a registered independent.
Aerows
(39,961 posts)I can drag to the polls, so there's that drove 
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)And those will be put together and made into a campaign commercial.
Hillary has no vulnerability remotely comparable to that.
Aerows
(39,961 posts)Generating turnout is the strongest thing that Democrats can do. When we have no enthusiasm and stay home, we hand elections in Congressional and Senate seats to Republicans on a silver platter.
When we get energized and have some political will behind us, Democrats win.
smiley
(1,432 posts)America needs a democratic socialist as President and the more people realize it the better off we'll be.
Hillary's vulnerability is many on the right hate her and some on the left completely distrust her. It's a vulnerability far greater than Bernie's political philosophy.
Go Bernie!
candelista
(1,986 posts)And no progressive politics remotely comparable to that.
Indepatriot
(1,253 posts)
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)we be wondering what new calumnies they'd come up with if even a TENTH of what they were claiming was true?
Yes, she is a moderate liberal progressive. She always has been and still is. We always knew that.
She is trying to get elected within a tremendously corrupted system. No one can win without making grave concessions. We always knew that too.
No one can stand the kind of scrutiny and slander she has undergone continually for over 20 years and appear squeaky clean. We always kenw that.
The right continually attacks our will to gather behind any candidate who can win. We need to never forget that.
Aerows
(39,961 posts)"Yes, she is a moderate liberal progressive. She always has been and still is. We always knew that. "
That's exactly why I will vote for Bernie Sanders. I feel that our country doesn't need a want-to-be-on-your-side, I want an I-always-have-been.
I'm hardly a Democratic party loon expressing such a sentiment at this point. I'm fed up with a lot of things members of our party are doing.
Logical
(22,457 posts)Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)By then we will have had 2 debates and she would have testified before the Benghazi Witch Hunt, but we know the email thing will take up a big part of that.
I am all about Bernie Sanders and I think she is a terrible candidate running a terrible campaign. Even so, it is to early to give up on this yet. If it gets into the Holiday Season and she hasn't put this behind her, it may be time to realize that this scandal has legs. We can't risk her being our nominee if she and her campaign can't bury this thing before the new year.
MuseRider
(35,176 posts)She fits you and you like her. Give it a little more time.
My only worry is that this will forever be fought giving her little time to govern if she is elected but then it will always be something for her. She is like dope to the Republicans. I think some of them would just fold if she was not around for them to torment.
This thing worries me but you like her, I would say to wait a little longer and see what happens. There is time.
still_one
(98,883 posts)at the issues he stands on, but that he identifies himself as a Democratic Socialist, and they will pile on in a similar way they are doing with Hillary, and in both cases it amounts to nothing, except for the right wing propaganda machine
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)You think it will be bad for him, I think it will help him.
Time will tell.
still_one
(98,883 posts)means, and I suggest they won't.
As an example, when President Obama explained very carefully what the Iran deal consisted of, and what it didn't consist of, the first question from the illustrious press corp was why didn't it doesn't address all the middle east problems, and it continues. That is why initially the public supported the deal, but after the insidious nature of the media propaganda machine that has been reversed:
http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/20/politics/iran-deal-poll-majority-americans-disapprove/
The Swift Boating of Kerry, and Howard Dean laugh are additional examples of how diabolical the corporate media is. They control who and what get attention, and what is and isn't news.
If Bernie is given the airtime he will definitely be formidable, but it isn't going to be easy, especially since he is up against the republican money machine, which is at least a billion dollars worth.
I will say this, if anyone can do, Bernie can, as long as they give him the opportunity.
Still it will be quite difficult in the red states
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)He will get his message out.
Hillary will get swift boated too. I think it will be worse for her because of the Snipergate scandal that she really really screwed up badly. Add to that this whole email crap and how badly her campaign is dealing with that. Then there will be attacks about the Clinton Foundation and her dealing with a Swiss bank which later paid her husband 1.5 million in speaking fees. Hillary has lots of baggage and her trustworthy numbers are terrible. If people don't trust you it is impossible to defend yourself from these types of attacks.
At least Bernie is right side up on the trustworthy front, and he has far less baggage.
still_one
(98,883 posts)Foundation, and other issues are coming from the republican activist and strategist Peter Schweizer, whose allegations in his book have been debunked, though still echoed throughout fox news, and other right wing outlets.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)A majority of Americans don't trust her. She can't defend herself if she isn't trusted.
840high
(17,196 posts)RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)I say bring it on. When they do we will all be able to point out how they suck at the socialism teat, and then won't they be embarrassed?
Now, as for Hillary... this is not looking good for her. She should probably just cash in and retire; would save all of us a lot of grief.
still_one
(98,883 posts)How the media decides what they consider news worthy and not news worthy. When Bernie was given the opportunity, he set the NY Post porter straight when she tried to ask him an inane question about "Hillary's hair", and in situations like that, where he is given an opportunity to respond, he will deal with it more than adequately.
It should be noted though, when folks in red states who collect social security and medicare, are asked, they continue to vote against what should be their own interests.
If Bernie or any candidate for that matter can move the media to cover the issues they deem as important, that would be a big step in the right direction.
calguy
(6,150 posts)If Bernie is the nominee the right will simplify the election to one simple question: "Do you want socialism or FREEDOM!!
That's all you'll see on TV. That same theme with cleverly chosen footage of Russia and Cuba. That's what you'll see. For this reason I feel Bernie is unelectable. The GOP would to run against Bernie. Much easier target than Hillary ever would be.
Indepatriot
(1,253 posts)Bernie and his team just need to pound the corporatist label on the head clown just as often as the GOP & MSM use Socialist.
Major Hogwash
(17,656 posts)I guarantee you every black man, woman, and child will have seen that video by Labor Day!!
That video is going viral.
So, you can forget the debates!
Who the hell is going to listen to her now??
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)What video are you referring to?
Why have you brought race into this?
I thought we were talking about the email scandal. Now I am confused.
Puzzledtraveller
(5,937 posts)Honest opinion. I really believe the WH knows the extent of what lays in wait for her and is working on Plan-B.
still_one
(98,883 posts)are referring to Biden.
Biden is not going to run. The media is getting their talking points from peter schweizer and other right wing hacks.
Aren't they still investigating Benghazi?
Puzzledtraveller
(5,937 posts)My opinion.
still_one
(98,883 posts)a bias toward different things, but mostly we agree on the major issues such as health care, social security, medicare, civil rights, gender rights, environmental rights, and trying to avoid war.
daybranch
(1,309 posts)Do they run Biden with a lot of his baggage or bring back Gore? I actually think Gore is much more electable than Biden.
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)daybranch
(1,309 posts)She is trying to spin it but the chronology she pushes does not match the facts. This will go down as another example of those who took special privilege and abused it to their downfall. If it is bull shit , she will be fine. The facts that have come out so far from federal judges and the FBI certainly make it look bad for her and she could even be prosecuted. I realize there are many out there who will say republicans did this too. I never believed multiple wrongs make a right and I want a democrat with a bit of respect for the rules and regulations written to safeguard our government and its classified material
I suspect Hillary and others are looking for a lower level person to take the fall, pretending she did not know anything was classified and just used what they gave her. Common people like myself will not let this stand if it appears to be happening.
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)This is right out of the Sean Hannity show.
still_one
(98,883 posts)this. Let me refresh your memory, they tried something similar with the Benghazi, and in fact that is what the repukes are trying to do, somehow relate it to the emails.
When you have the NY Times giving unfettered spewing of right wing propaganda by peter schweizer and his book, which has been discredited, you know this is a setup.
Maybe we can have more stories about how Hillary murdered Vince Foster, and other garbage while we are at it.
It was only a couple of weeks ago that the NY Times falsely claimed that they the justice department was looking into criminal charges regarding the emails. Not only was the story false, the NY Times did three different revisions to remove the inaccurate account.
Ironically, a similar thing is occurring with the Iran Deal, where AP has misrepresented a headline saying that Iran would be doing its own nuclear inspections. The implication was a deliberate misrepresentation of the facts, and the truth is slowly coming out.
Hillary will come out stronger after this
Starry Messenger
(32,381 posts)daybranch
(1,309 posts)I do and there are millions like me who followed the rules for decades regarding classified material Hillary might get past this if she told the truth but the chronology she spins do not agree with the facts and timing of the FOI requests. Lying is going to hurt her. Just because republicans have attacked her wrongly in my view in the past does not give her carte blanche to violate security procedures and then lie about how the information came out.
Starry Messenger
(32,381 posts)This is getting little traction outside the blogosphere. And, there was no lying. In a year, no one is even going to remember this issue.
840high
(17,196 posts)Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)NBC Nightly News led with it last night and this morning I overheard some shock jocks on someone else's radio talking about it.
Right now, it seems that if someone is talking politics it is either Trump or emails.
If SNL and the late night comics pick up on this it will be mainstream.
This isn't going away any time soon.
AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)Sorry, but insisting something isn't illegal does not make it right.
She knowingly defied State Dept policy of record-keeping and in the process stymied FOIA requests.
She and her supporters may not know it yet, but her candidacy has been irreparably damaged by her own hand.
Kilgore
(1,819 posts)Her rise or fall is based on how she handles the issue. Up to now, it has been handled poorly and the polls are beginning to show it.
AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)The other candidates and most people I know are anxious for the debates and a serious discussion of the issues.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)... she will have created her own destiny.
Hell Hath No Fury
(16,327 posts)She has months to clean up the email crap -- yes, she will need every bit of skill to do so, but it is not insurmountable. I say this as a Bernie supporter.
frylock
(34,825 posts)yet here we are, despite predictions from Team Clinton that this would all be water under the bridge by now.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)840high
(17,196 posts)under the bridge.
karynnj
(60,953 posts)This meant that everyone else reported to Clinton via a Clinton person, who might also have been on Clinton's server. Other than trying to raise the issue with the President or one of his top people, any State person would be speaking out against their boss and their boss' boss.
You are trying to give her a break by suggesting someone should have said no. In fact, the full extent of what she had done appears not to have been understood until nearly a year after she left. I would assume that the people who typically handle these things were completely intimidated by her and her people. (That said, it may take years to get that inside story. I suspect that those people were likely happy to have the more rule following Kerry.)
juajen
(8,515 posts)Why do you think Clinton and or her people wanted to do this, and what purpose did it serve. This is really stupid, and she, nor her people are stupid.
Just like the ridiculous shakeup over Benghai (sorry, got two sticky keys.) My point is, there is no point. Nothing for her to gain, so why in hell do you people believe it happened.
You do know, don't you, that you are making no sense. I can hear it now, "Let's have some fun with all these emails, won't that be fun and it will give us something to do, since we are all so bored. I like to play with emails, don't you.
karynnj
(60,953 posts)Just one device. That seems unlikely, because she had more than one anyway. Some have conjectured that she wanted full control of her email. However, as soon as you send an email, someone else has it as well - so you don't have complete control.
I agree with you. It made no sense. She has said herself that she wishes she had not done that.
I have no idea or insight into why she did. It may be something we never learn. All we know is that that is what she did and it has hurt her.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)
randys1
(16,286 posts)is the subject.
tularetom
(23,664 posts)She's a horrible campaigner, an uninspiring speaker, she lacks people skills, she has a ton of baggage and she changes her positions on issues on a frighteningly regular basis.
But she's running for this particular election since the morning after Election Day 2008, and somewhere along the line it was decided that 2016 was going to be "Her Turn". She may make it through the primaries on the strength of name recognition and familiarity, but there is absolutely no chance whatsoever that she'll become president, in 2016 or ever.
left-of-center2012
(34,195 posts)The day Bernie announced
Attorney in Texas
(3,373 posts)the next Benghazi - it is a phony controversy designed to give right-wing nutjobs some reason to burn Clinton in effigy.
By all means, give up on Clinton if you wish, but do so because she has not taken a clear enough position on TPP or Keystone or bank regulation and anti-monopolization and because she is more of a hawk generally an on the Iraq war in particular.
Blue_Adept
(6,499 posts)The balance of posts here takes everything to the hyper extreme.
It's like when you're watching one of the morning shows and they start with some piece that "everyone is talking about!" online but you realize that it's just one small community that's talking about it and even there it's divisive.
Everything just feels far more in your face here. I'd recommend just trashing GD
for a few weeks and seeing how you feel about things.
AppalachianLeftist
(40 posts)Obama never made it that easy for them. He kept his nose clean and stayed on the straight and narrow.
That's why the shit they made up on him never picked up steam.
The Clintons, on the other hand, hand them these scandals gift-wrapped with shiny bows on top.
Their entire wing of the party belongs in the dustbin of history, to be honest, and now's the time to start sweeping.
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)AppalachianLeftist
(40 posts)The rest wouldn't be missed.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)Hortensis
(58,785 posts)they accused of being involved in the drug trade, murder, theft, rape (of a white woman, of course), vandalizing the White House, hanging condoms on the WH Christmas Tree, and much, much else. No prototypical black criminal cliche was left unslung at our first "black" president.
As for Obama? He was black, and the worst they thought they could get away with was claiming he wasn't born here and associated with protest leaders from decades ago. Oh, yeah -- and working as a neighborhood organizer instead of going for the money on Wall Street. Bad!
MelungeonWoman
(502 posts)The DLC isn't going to come up with anyone better, let her have at it.
livetohike
(24,267 posts)latest faux outrage. Seems there are plenty of newbies coming to DU lately to tell us how serious this is.
My 84 year old Mom and 89 year old m-i-l think she is being picked on and they don't like it. It's not swaying their vote and I doubt many others either.
handmade34
(24,010 posts)I will not let devious Republican strategies dictate my actions… this is a media circus and too many people are buying into it
WillyT
(72,631 posts)Donald Trump can talk about bleeding out of "whatever"...
While HRC may have had shit classified AFTER it was sent/received.
LibAsHell
(180 posts)Who gives a FUCK about the fucking emails? Do you think this somehow changes the fact she would be a much, much better president than any of the clowns running on the other side? Nevermind the fact there's still no evidence she did anything.
HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)Obama is the person who needed to make sure his Secretaries followed policy.
Not saying he had to do the work, but he's the person who should have told his chief of staff to send someone to police IT policy at State.
Darb
(2,807 posts)But you knew that didn't you?
Concern noted a summarily dismissed for the rubbish that it is.
GP6971
(37,984 posts)It hasn't even started yet.
oasis
(53,649 posts)It'll all come down to the women's vote.
Bonobo
(29,257 posts)Poll: Hillary losing support of white women
By Isabelle Taft
8/4/15 10:30 AM EDT
A new poll shows Hillary Clinton is losing support among a demographic that is key to her efforts to win the White House: white women.
In July, 34 percent of white women held a favorable view of Clinton, while 53 percent held an unfavorable view. Those numbers were down from June, when 44 percent of white women held a favorable view of Clinton and 43 percent an unfavorable view.
Story Continued Below
The decline in support comes amid continued scrutiny of Clinton’s use of a private email account while at the State Department. The Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll was conducted at the end of July just after the Justice Department said it was looking into whether classified information had been sent over Clinton’s personal email and private server.
Women are a crucial target demographic for Clinton, who hopes women eager to witness the first female president will support her as enthusiastically as African-Americans supported President Obama in 2008 and 2012. Obama built momentum among women in the last two election cycles: in 2012, women overall supported Obama over Romney by 12 percentage points, while Romney won men by 8 percentage points, according to Gallup Polling. But among white women, the picture was not as rosy for Democrats in 2012, as Romney won that demographic by 14 points.
oasis
(53,649 posts)You can be sure women's issues will top the list of Hill's campaign stops. Long before election night you can toss those polls.
AngryAmish
(25,704 posts)
hootinholler
(26,451 posts)The time to give up on Hillary was in 2007.
Oh, and I will politely disagree with you that she is the best on any issue.
agincourt
(1,996 posts)She is far and away better than whatever the GOP will nominate, but if she can't win, they need to find someone who can. Fortunately there is still a lot of time.
leftyladyfrommo
(19,995 posts)Just going to see how this plays out.