General Discussion

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)

85. I'm sorry if I was unclear ...

Sat Mar 28, 2015, 12:50 PM

Mar 2015

I was responding to an/the assertion that HRC is a republican, so he/she would not vote for HRC.

Both of us were posting under the obvious qualifier, that HRC was the democratic Nominee.

If you seriously want her to win, I recommend you stick with reasons to vote for her rather than pontifications or future predictions.

I am undecided on an HRC candidacy (and won't make any decision until the primary season is underway); but, what I am NOT undecided on, is I will affirmatively vote FOR the Democratic nominee.

But thank you for your recommendation regarding pontifications and "future predictions" (can one make "past predictions"?). Perhaps, in the future, you will make your recommendations based on the context of my/the comment ... or, recognize that taking the/a comment in context would render your comment out of place.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

95 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

WallStreet’s POLITICAL SHAKEDOWN:We’ll Stop Funding Dems if Elizabeth Warren won’t SIT DOWN & SHUTUP [View all] Segami Mar 2015 OP

There couldn't be better publicity against banks! marym625 Mar 2015 #1

HRC will never fight for the people. Vincardog Mar 2015 #6

Oh no doubt marym625 Mar 2015 #12

Oh silly ...she will fight for the new middle class ...which is bankers and Wall Street brokers. L0oniX Mar 2015 #14

This. hifiguy Mar 2015 #18

That should be my pat response to all pro Hillary posts: Sorry ...I'm not in that club. L0oniX Mar 2015 #21

Feel free to use when necessary and appropriate! hifiguy Mar 2015 #23

At least it will give the pro Hillary Goldman oligarchy alert crew something to do. L0oniX Mar 2015 #24

never stonecutter357 Mar 2015 #39

and here come the hil haters azureblue Mar 2015 #42

How about you Hill Lovers give us a reason to vote for her? She can beat other pugs is not one. Vincardog Mar 2015 #44

Why not ... 1StrongBlackMan Mar 2015 #47

Because I don't want to vote for a republican. Vincardog Mar 2015 #63

A vote for HRC wouldn't be a vote for a republican ... 1StrongBlackMan Mar 2015 #74

"a vote for anyone other than (would be a vote for a republican)" Veilex Mar 2015 #84

I'm sorry if I was unclear ... 1StrongBlackMan Mar 2015 #85

Perhaps I was unclear "She can beat OTHER pugs is not one" because she is a pug. She is clearly Vincardog Mar 2015 #90

I have answered ... 1StrongBlackMan Mar 2015 #93

The lesser of the two evils is STILL EVIL. You can't give 1 reason to vote for her. It says a lot Vincardog Mar 2015 #94

You have gave you the same reason ... 1StrongBlackMan Mar 2015 #95

"a comment in context would render your comment out of place" - I would happily make a retraction.. Veilex Mar 2015 #92

The Question Is Yallow Mar 2015 #81

Of course "winning" is more important. Yeah we win. More important that reestablishing our rhett o rick Mar 2015 #73

I agree ... Yes, we do need change ... 1StrongBlackMan Mar 2015 #76

I recognize that some prefer to boil slowly. I don't agree. I see that we are being rhett o rick Mar 2015 #77

So rather than the "slow boil", you prefer the "quick burn"? {sigh} ... 1StrongBlackMan Mar 2015 #78

I would rather take the risk of the "quick burn" or liberty than bow down to the system rhett o rick Mar 2015 #80

Okay. n/t 1StrongBlackMan Mar 2015 #82

" Gawd you guys are not only shrill and hysterical, you never offer a viable alternative" DonCoquixote Mar 2015 #54

+1,000 Scuba Mar 2015 #55

+10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 Phlem Mar 2015 #56

So if that's true why don't you give us a substantive reason to support H. Clinton. rhett o rick Mar 2015 #72

If anything she will get a flood of money from them to make sure Warren doesn't have a chance. L0oniX Mar 2015 #16

You're probably right marym625 Mar 2015 #26

Yep, that's how it works. zeemike Mar 2015 #31

Exactly! Fairgo Mar 2015 #50

OK, does that mean that small contributors like us need to step up and contribute more money? NBachers Mar 2015 #2

yes but they dont give that much to dems Romeo.lima333 Mar 2015 #3

This message was self-deleted by its author Romeo.lima333 Mar 2015 #7

This message was self-deleted by its author johnnyreb Mar 2015 #4

If he monied elite don't stop corrupting our elections we should publicly fund them, and OUTLAW Vincardog Mar 2015 #5

1st they laugh at you ..... Romeo.lima333 Mar 2015 #8

Ain't it the truth. They walked right into that metaphor. closeupready Mar 2015 #25

negotiations the wall street way Romeo.lima333 Mar 2015 #9

LMFAO ...spewing over my keyboard. Damn it ...you owe me a new red back light keyboard. L0oniX Mar 2015 #11

i remember when that came out and have never forgot it Romeo.lima333 Mar 2015 #17

I remember buying that issue of the Lampoon when I was 16. hifiguy Mar 2015 #19

yea me too Romeo.lima333 Mar 2015 #20

Too damn bad P. J. O'Rourke became a douche nozzle republican. Half-Century Man Mar 2015 #65

Beautiful turbinetree Mar 2015 #43

Hard to decide who is more of an enemy of the common people, Shitigroup, SkankofAmerica, HellsCargo L0oniX Mar 2015 #10

After their bailout by us taxpayers we should have thrown the crooks in jail! How dare them to speak B Calm Mar 2015 #13

K & R !!! WillyT Mar 2015 #15

Hey banksters, hifiguy Mar 2015 #22

She's answered them on Twitter! Liberalynn Mar 2015 #27

Warren/Sanders 2016 ybbor Mar 2015 #40

Check in with Michael Lewis (The Big Short). SleeplessinSoCal Mar 2015 #28

WallStreet’s POLITICAL SHAKEDOWN:We’ll Stop Funding Dems if Elizabeth Warren won’t SIT DOWN & SHUTUP The CCC Mar 2015 #29

They just admitted to The Wizard Mar 2015 #30

Why do we need $$$ to make our candidate the winner? erronis Mar 2015 #32

K & R Thespian2 Mar 2015 #33

the quest for $ because "we need to win this" has left the party completely open: patrons MisterP Mar 2015 #34

Wall Street tries to depict her as angry or anti-business for promoting sound policy. pa28 Mar 2015 #35

Good. Maybe then the Democrats that have been getting money from the banks will start liberal_at_heart Mar 2015 #36

Hopefully including HRC. No $$$ for Hillary? 99th_Monkey Mar 2015 #86

could be great publicity if any corporate media would carry the story rurallib Mar 2015 #37

Churches, insurance & oil Companies and financial institutions banned from political activism Sheepshank Mar 2015 #38

This turbinetree Mar 2015 #41

+100 nt 99th_Monkey Mar 2015 #87

Now is the time to yell louder.... N_E_1 for Tennis Mar 2015 #45

This was posted earlier this morning in General already cstanleytech Mar 2015 #46

And this is a surprise because? Android3.14 Mar 2015 #48

Good - it's about time the illusion is dropped. nt TBF Mar 2015 #49

K&R! This post should have hundreds of recommendations! Enthusiast Mar 2015 #51

I think these banksters have just cut their own throats. raven mad Mar 2015 #52

OF course DonCoquixote Mar 2015 #53

A conspiracy? DeSwiss Mar 2015 #57

It wouldn't make any difference if they weren't the party. n/t jtuck004 Mar 2015 #58

Ok then; It's on! Populist_Prole Mar 2015 #59

If Dem leadership were smart, they'd publicly say F*** You to the banks CanonRay Mar 2015 #60

Will HRC say F*ck you to banksters too? 99th_Monkey Mar 2015 #88

I like the way she is full finger pointing... the_sly_pig Mar 2015 #61

I think I may be in love with a married woman. Zorra Mar 2015 #62

The more they hate her, the better she's doing nikto Mar 2015 #64

Madam President. Nt Fearless Mar 2015 #66

Breath-taking arrogance and hubris malaise Mar 2015 #67

Thanks Wall Street You really made voting even easier Hey Dems take Wall Street Money and You dont anotojefiremnesuka Mar 2015 #68

FUCK YOU, WALLSTREET!! you gawdamned suit and tie wearing muthafuckas!! just fuck right off. Tuesday Afternoon Mar 2015 #69

first line of OP says it all heaven05 Mar 2015 #70

So basically we the people are being threatened by corporations SusanCalvin Mar 2015 #71

Does this mean Hillary's hedgefund son in law Ichingcarpenter Mar 2015 #75

One question why is Reuters the only so called media, the source for this so-called meeting... Historic NY Mar 2015 #79

The evil greedy banksters may yet convince Elizabeth she MUST run for Prez Dems to Win Mar 2015 #83

Well then do it. Would be a good thing actually mvd Mar 2015 #89

Warren has hit the Wall. Scrabbleddie Mar 2015 #91