|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On May 04 2017 02:06 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2017 02:03 Plansix wrote:On May 04 2017 01:55 a_flayer wrote:On May 04 2017 01:25 Plansix wrote:On May 04 2017 01:21 Simberto wrote:On May 04 2017 00:46 a_flayer wrote:Health care won't be solved until you solve this problem: https://www.opensecrets.org/pres16/select-industries?ind=H04How do you expect the government to pass any sort of legislation regarding health care that lowers the absurdly high price of medicine/treatments when politicians are financed by the people that sell them? Gotta agree here. Really only legal bribes on that level can explain the contortions US politicians go to to avoid an idea as simple as "Lets pick any one of the dozens of working systems from other first world countries, and just copy that" You don't have to reinvent the wheel. There are many different types of wheels that are already proven to be working. We have car wheels, bike wheels, train wheels, whatever you want. Just take a look at how they are build, noone is hiding it. But you insist on starting with "No, no, no! Our wheel is going to be square! My theory says that square is the best shape for a wheel! We just need to figure out a few kinks, than you will see how amazing our square wheel is. In fact, there really is no other shape a wheel could take. Round wheels murder babies!" And you don't realize that the people who make those statements have obviously been paid by Square Wheel Inc, the worlds only producer of square wheels. We don't even need to go outside our country, several states have working healthcare systems. But Republicans are just resistant to be responsible for anything and would rather place their faith in the Invisible Hand to assure affordable coverage. Yes, and just like Republicans are owned by pharmaceutical companies, they are also owned by Wallstreet. And that's which is why Democrats can't pass legislation to stop them from extracting wealth from society through the most ridiculous means possible. https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/toprecips.php?id=D000022219&cycle=2016This is the Robert Mercer hedge-fund company. A man who held far more sway over the US elections than the Russians did. He is part owner of companies like Cambridge Analytica (in short: targeted political ads on facebook), Breitbart (in short: content for political ads), and whatever SuperPACs (hey, look at that, political ads!) he helped fund to create tons bullshit out of minor inconveniences such as the leaked e-mails. He is just as involved in all of these companies as Steve Bannon was. Oh, and look at that! Democrats actually receive more direct campaign donations than Republicans from this asshole. Including Charles Schumer ($64,800) and Hillary Clinton ($40,200). Tell me again how its the Republicans that are the problem in US politics. It's a really convincing line! On May 04 2017 01:20 a_flayer wrote:On May 04 2017 01:11 Doodsmack wrote:
Let's be friends.
What's that I hear? Is it a bunch of cocks hitting desks at the NSA as they all get erections at the thought of legislation being passed to make this [stopping Russia!] happen? What you need to do to stop the Russians from hacking (which was their only real influence, I hope you will agree) is enforcing that people/corporations/organizations who find bugs - anyone - report those bugs to the software maintainers so they can be fixed. But somehow, I don't think that's the kind of legislation that will be passed. On May 04 2017 01:25 Plansix wrote:
Whoa there, you are talking about regulating the political darling that is the tech industry. That scrappy little up start needs to remain unregulated until they push all print publications out of business, destroy the entire taxi industry and can sell our personal data to other governments. Then they might be big enough for some oversight. I'm also talking about stopping the CIA/FBI from hoarding bugs to exploit for themselves (and whoever else happens to find those bugs). There's nothing secure about deliberately leaving bugs in software. This problem with hacking is going to continue to get far, far worse as everything is connected these days. If all the guys on the side of "good" don't contribute to solving this problem, we will live in the digital equivalent of the Wild West for years to come. This is one of the reasons why I think we should all be pushing government to use exclusively open source software. So that the whole force of the government (and the corporations hired by the government) can be behind making that software secure, and also leave it available for the consumer. But you know, that's communism, I guess. Bro its real simple. One party wants to make sure my wife and nephew can always get health care. The other wants to put it in the hands of an uncontrolled market force and hope it works out. The other issues you raised are valid and I have always said I want less money in politics. The Democrats are the only ones who are pushing for election reform in any way. If you don't think they will follow through, feel free to start a single issue party and run on that. You will likely secure my vote. The Democrats are far from perfect, but there is only one party actively trying to fuck me and a lot of people I know over on a daily basis. What kind of monster holds the health of their family as more important than the rights of cake makers?
Someone who is far more selective about the hill I am willing to die on.
|
Did y'all see the transcript or hear the audio of Limbaugh lighting up Pence over the budget deal yesterday?
Source.
|
I like the part where Pence describes the NK soldiers wear “the face of repression” and Rush says they are evil robots. It shows you which is the larger garbage human in the equation: Hint, it isn’t the guy who wants to shock the gay out of teenagers.
|
On May 04 2017 02:06 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2017 02:03 Plansix wrote:On May 04 2017 01:55 a_flayer wrote:On May 04 2017 01:25 Plansix wrote:On May 04 2017 01:21 Simberto wrote:On May 04 2017 00:46 a_flayer wrote:Health care won't be solved until you solve this problem: https://www.opensecrets.org/pres16/select-industries?ind=H04How do you expect the government to pass any sort of legislation regarding health care that lowers the absurdly high price of medicine/treatments when politicians are financed by the people that sell them? Gotta agree here. Really only legal bribes on that level can explain the contortions US politicians go to to avoid an idea as simple as "Lets pick any one of the dozens of working systems from other first world countries, and just copy that" You don't have to reinvent the wheel. There are many different types of wheels that are already proven to be working. We have car wheels, bike wheels, train wheels, whatever you want. Just take a look at how they are build, noone is hiding it. But you insist on starting with "No, no, no! Our wheel is going to be square! My theory says that square is the best shape for a wheel! We just need to figure out a few kinks, than you will see how amazing our square wheel is. In fact, there really is no other shape a wheel could take. Round wheels murder babies!" And you don't realize that the people who make those statements have obviously been paid by Square Wheel Inc, the worlds only producer of square wheels. We don't even need to go outside our country, several states have working healthcare systems. But Republicans are just resistant to be responsible for anything and would rather place their faith in the Invisible Hand to assure affordable coverage. Yes, and just like Republicans are owned by pharmaceutical companies, they are also owned by Wallstreet. And that's which is why Democrats can't pass legislation to stop them from extracting wealth from society through the most ridiculous means possible. https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/toprecips.php?id=D000022219&cycle=2016This is the Robert Mercer hedge-fund company. A man who held far more sway over the US elections than the Russians did. He is part owner of companies like Cambridge Analytica (in short: targeted political ads on facebook), Breitbart (in short: content for political ads), and whatever SuperPACs (hey, look at that, political ads!) he helped fund to create tons bullshit out of minor inconveniences such as the leaked e-mails. He is just as involved in all of these companies as Steve Bannon was. Oh, and look at that! Democrats actually receive more direct campaign donations than Republicans from this asshole. Including Charles Schumer ($64,800) and Hillary Clinton ($40,200). Tell me again how its the Republicans that are the problem in US politics. It's a really convincing line! On May 04 2017 01:20 a_flayer wrote:What's that I hear? Is it a bunch of cocks hitting desks at the NSA as they all get erections at the thought of legislation being passed to make this [stopping Russia!] happen? What you need to do to stop the Russians from hacking (which was their only real influence, I hope you will agree) is enforcing that people/corporations/organizations who find bugs - anyone - report those bugs to the software maintainers so they can be fixed. But somehow, I don't think that's the kind of legislation that will be passed. On May 04 2017 01:25 Plansix wrote:
Whoa there, you are talking about regulating the political darling that is the tech industry. That scrappy little up start needs to remain unregulated until they push all print publications out of business, destroy the entire taxi industry and can sell our personal data to other governments. Then they might be big enough for some oversight. I'm also talking about stopping the CIA/FBI from hoarding bugs to exploit for themselves (and whoever else happens to find those bugs). There's nothing secure about deliberately leaving bugs in software. This problem with hacking is going to continue to get far, far worse as everything is connected these days. If all the guys on the side of "good" don't contribute to solving this problem, we will live in the digital equivalent of the Wild West for years to come. This is one of the reasons why I think we should all be pushing government to use exclusively open source software. So that the whole force of the government (and the corporations hired by the government) can be behind making that software secure, and also leave it available for the consumer. But you know, that's communism, I guess. Bro its real simple. One party wants to make sure my wife and nephew can always get health care. The other wants to put it in the hands of an uncontrolled market force and hope it works out. The other issues you raised are valid and I have always said I want less money in politics. The Democrats are the only ones who are pushing for election reform in any way. If you don't think they will follow through, feel free to start a single issue party and run on that. You will likely secure my vote. The Democrats are far from perfect, but there is only one party actively trying to fuck me and a lot of people I know over on a daily basis. What kind of monster holds the health of their family as more important than the rights of cake makers?
Speaking of the rights of cake makers, I can't wait to see how much of a disaster that rumored religious freedom executive order is gonna be.
|
Clinton launching PAC to act as 'quiet catalyst'
Hillary Clinton is reportedly planning to launch a PAC to act as a "quiet catalyst" for organizations she feels strongly about.
Axios reported Wednesday the former Democratic presidential nominee's PAC will also assist 2018 congressional candidates.
A source told Axios the PAC will work with organizations that rose up after the election of President Trump. It will also work with existing groups that were reenergized by the presidential race.
Clinton has already met with some of the groups, the source told Axios.
She will also begin paid speaking, the news outlet reported.
Source
|
On May 04 2017 02:33 Tachion wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2017 02:06 Mohdoo wrote:On May 04 2017 02:03 Plansix wrote:On May 04 2017 01:55 a_flayer wrote:On May 04 2017 01:25 Plansix wrote:On May 04 2017 01:21 Simberto wrote:On May 04 2017 00:46 a_flayer wrote:Health care won't be solved until you solve this problem: https://www.opensecrets.org/pres16/select-industries?ind=H04How do you expect the government to pass any sort of legislation regarding health care that lowers the absurdly high price of medicine/treatments when politicians are financed by the people that sell them? Gotta agree here. Really only legal bribes on that level can explain the contortions US politicians go to to avoid an idea as simple as "Lets pick any one of the dozens of working systems from other first world countries, and just copy that" You don't have to reinvent the wheel. There are many different types of wheels that are already proven to be working. We have car wheels, bike wheels, train wheels, whatever you want. Just take a look at how they are build, noone is hiding it. But you insist on starting with "No, no, no! Our wheel is going to be square! My theory says that square is the best shape for a wheel! We just need to figure out a few kinks, than you will see how amazing our square wheel is. In fact, there really is no other shape a wheel could take. Round wheels murder babies!" And you don't realize that the people who make those statements have obviously been paid by Square Wheel Inc, the worlds only producer of square wheels. We don't even need to go outside our country, several states have working healthcare systems. But Republicans are just resistant to be responsible for anything and would rather place their faith in the Invisible Hand to assure affordable coverage. Yes, and just like Republicans are owned by pharmaceutical companies, they are also owned by Wallstreet. And that's which is why Democrats can't pass legislation to stop them from extracting wealth from society through the most ridiculous means possible. https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/toprecips.php?id=D000022219&cycle=2016This is the Robert Mercer hedge-fund company. A man who held far more sway over the US elections than the Russians did. He is part owner of companies like Cambridge Analytica (in short: targeted political ads on facebook), Breitbart (in short: content for political ads), and whatever SuperPACs (hey, look at that, political ads!) he helped fund to create tons bullshit out of minor inconveniences such as the leaked e-mails. He is just as involved in all of these companies as Steve Bannon was. Oh, and look at that! Democrats actually receive more direct campaign donations than Republicans from this asshole. Including Charles Schumer ($64,800) and Hillary Clinton ($40,200). Tell me again how its the Republicans that are the problem in US politics. It's a really convincing line! On May 04 2017 01:20 a_flayer wrote:What's that I hear? Is it a bunch of cocks hitting desks at the NSA as they all get erections at the thought of legislation being passed to make this [stopping Russia!] happen? What you need to do to stop the Russians from hacking (which was their only real influence, I hope you will agree) is enforcing that people/corporations/organizations who find bugs - anyone - report those bugs to the software maintainers so they can be fixed. But somehow, I don't think that's the kind of legislation that will be passed. On May 04 2017 01:25 Plansix wrote:
Whoa there, you are talking about regulating the political darling that is the tech industry. That scrappy little up start needs to remain unregulated until they push all print publications out of business, destroy the entire taxi industry and can sell our personal data to other governments. Then they might be big enough for some oversight. I'm also talking about stopping the CIA/FBI from hoarding bugs to exploit for themselves (and whoever else happens to find those bugs). There's nothing secure about deliberately leaving bugs in software. This problem with hacking is going to continue to get far, far worse as everything is connected these days. If all the guys on the side of "good" don't contribute to solving this problem, we will live in the digital equivalent of the Wild West for years to come. This is one of the reasons why I think we should all be pushing government to use exclusively open source software. So that the whole force of the government (and the corporations hired by the government) can be behind making that software secure, and also leave it available for the consumer. But you know, that's communism, I guess. Bro its real simple. One party wants to make sure my wife and nephew can always get health care. The other wants to put it in the hands of an uncontrolled market force and hope it works out. The other issues you raised are valid and I have always said I want less money in politics. The Democrats are the only ones who are pushing for election reform in any way. If you don't think they will follow through, feel free to start a single issue party and run on that. You will likely secure my vote. The Democrats are far from perfect, but there is only one party actively trying to fuck me and a lot of people I know over on a daily basis. What kind of monster holds the health of their family as more important than the rights of cake makers? Speaking of the rights of cake makers, I can't wait to see how much of a disaster that rumored religious freedom executive order is gonna be.
If it gets signed I will eagerly await the mere hours it will take for a court somewhere to strike it down. Hopefully its the 9th again for maximum tweet hilarity.
|
i feel like Hillary has a new purpose in life, not the uplifting of the Democratic Party, but finding a way to bring trump down. I have never seen her as authentic as when she was angry and bitter about her loss yesterday. While it was not a good look for her, in that she looked immature and whiny, she was the most real she has been in the last 2 years. Either way I could tell she's got a new mission.
|
On May 04 2017 01:20 a_flayer wrote:What's that I hear? Is it a bunch of cocks hitting desks at the NSA as they all get erections at the thought of legislation being passed to make this [stopping Russia!] happen? What you need to do to stop the Russians from hacking (which was their only real influence, I hope you will agree) is enforcing that people/corporations/organizations who find bugs - anyone - report those bugs to the software maintainers so they can be fixed. But somehow, I don't think that's the kind of legislation that will be passed.
I would wager that social media and fake news had influence as well.
|
The last thing Trump blamed on the ninth actually hadn't even reached that level when he blamed it on them (if challenged it would have gone there though)
|
On May 04 2017 02:35 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +Clinton launching PAC to act as 'quiet catalyst'
Hillary Clinton is reportedly planning to launch a PAC to act as a "quiet catalyst" for organizations she feels strongly about.
Axios reported Wednesday the former Democratic presidential nominee's PAC will also assist 2018 congressional candidates.
A source told Axios the PAC will work with organizations that rose up after the election of President Trump. It will also work with existing groups that were reenergized by the presidential race.
Clinton has already met with some of the groups, the source told Axios.
She will also begin paid speaking, the news outlet reported. Source
And here we go. The quest to remake the Clinton brand as some kind of revolutionary cause begins.
|
On May 04 2017 02:42 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2017 02:35 GreenHorizons wrote:Clinton launching PAC to act as 'quiet catalyst'
Hillary Clinton is reportedly planning to launch a PAC to act as a "quiet catalyst" for organizations she feels strongly about.
Axios reported Wednesday the former Democratic presidential nominee's PAC will also assist 2018 congressional candidates.
A source told Axios the PAC will work with organizations that rose up after the election of President Trump. It will also work with existing groups that were reenergized by the presidential race.
Clinton has already met with some of the groups, the source told Axios.
She will also begin paid speaking, the news outlet reported. Source And here we go. The quest to remake the Clinton brand as some kind of revolutionary cause begins.
It's up to her former supporters to have an intervention, but I imagine they won't admit she's desperately hoping for a 2020 run until a couple weeks after she announces.
|
On May 04 2017 02:39 Doodsmack wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2017 01:20 a_flayer wrote:What's that I hear? Is it a bunch of cocks hitting desks at the NSA as they all get erections at the thought of legislation being passed to make this [stopping Russia!] happen? What you need to do to stop the Russians from hacking (which was their only real influence, I hope you will agree) is enforcing that people/corporations/organizations who find bugs - anyone - report those bugs to the software maintainers so they can be fixed. But somehow, I don't think that's the kind of legislation that will be passed. I would wager that social media and fake news had influence as well.
Give me a few examples of this fake news originating from Russia that was relatively widespread in social media amongst the US population, if you would be so kind.
|
I like how we still don’t know the goal of her new PAC. If it was to do something awesome, like combating dangerous clowns like Alex Jones, I would be all about it.(for those who don’t know, families for Sandy Hook are still receiving death threats for “making up their children’s murder)
But I doubt it is anything that noble.
On May 04 2017 02:47 a_flayer wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2017 02:39 Doodsmack wrote:On May 04 2017 01:20 a_flayer wrote:What's that I hear? Is it a bunch of cocks hitting desks at the NSA as they all get erections at the thought of legislation being passed to make this [stopping Russia!] happen? What you need to do to stop the Russians from hacking (which was their only real influence, I hope you will agree) is enforcing that people/corporations/organizations who find bugs - anyone - report those bugs to the software maintainers so they can be fixed. But somehow, I don't think that's the kind of legislation that will be passed. I would wager that social media and fake news had influence as well. Give me a few examples of this fake news originating from Russia that was relatively widespread in social media amongst the US population, if you would be so kind.
The point of propaganda is to make it hard to find out who produced it and where its information came from. It makes it harder to disprove if there is no source. You are asking for things the FBI and all its resources have been tasked to prove.
|
On May 04 2017 02:45 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2017 02:42 Mohdoo wrote:On May 04 2017 02:35 GreenHorizons wrote:Clinton launching PAC to act as 'quiet catalyst'
Hillary Clinton is reportedly planning to launch a PAC to act as a "quiet catalyst" for organizations she feels strongly about.
Axios reported Wednesday the former Democratic presidential nominee's PAC will also assist 2018 congressional candidates.
A source told Axios the PAC will work with organizations that rose up after the election of President Trump. It will also work with existing groups that were reenergized by the presidential race.
Clinton has already met with some of the groups, the source told Axios.
She will also begin paid speaking, the news outlet reported. Source And here we go. The quest to remake the Clinton brand as some kind of revolutionary cause begins. It's up to her former supporters to have an intervention, but I imagine they won't admit she's desperately hoping for a 2020 run until a couple weeks after she announces.
Only people I know who legit want Clinton for Clinton are my batshit crazy mega-feminist friends who wear shirts like "The future is female" and all that crap. Its not going to take much for a huge majority of people to prefer someone fresh over Clinton.
I also remain confident that Ellison will be disruptive enough to make a huge stink if the party starts drifting towards another pre-determined Clinton run. I wonder how capable Ellison would be at dismantling super delegates. My intuition tells me even if the party planned to get rid of supers, they would only announce the change some time in 2019 for the better optics.
|
On May 04 2017 02:48 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2017 02:45 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 04 2017 02:42 Mohdoo wrote:On May 04 2017 02:35 GreenHorizons wrote:Clinton launching PAC to act as 'quiet catalyst'
Hillary Clinton is reportedly planning to launch a PAC to act as a "quiet catalyst" for organizations she feels strongly about.
Axios reported Wednesday the former Democratic presidential nominee's PAC will also assist 2018 congressional candidates.
A source told Axios the PAC will work with organizations that rose up after the election of President Trump. It will also work with existing groups that were reenergized by the presidential race.
Clinton has already met with some of the groups, the source told Axios.
She will also begin paid speaking, the news outlet reported. Source And here we go. The quest to remake the Clinton brand as some kind of revolutionary cause begins. It's up to her former supporters to have an intervention, but I imagine they won't admit she's desperately hoping for a 2020 run until a couple weeks after she announces. Only people I know who legit want Clinton for Clinton are my batshit crazy mega-feminist friends who wear shirts like "The future is female" and all that crap. Its not going to take much for a huge majority of people to prefer someone fresh over Clinton. I also remain confident that Ellison will be disruptive enough to make a huge stink if the party starts drifting towards another pre-determined Clinton run. I wonder how capable Ellison would be at dismantling super delegates. My intuition tells me even if the party planned to get rid of supers, they would only announce the change some time in 2019 for the better optics.
After watching Trump forcefully hijack the Republican Party and him being busy running it into the ground I don't see any situation in which the DNC would want to get rid of super delegates.
|
On May 04 2017 02:47 a_flayer wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2017 02:39 Doodsmack wrote:On May 04 2017 01:20 a_flayer wrote:What's that I hear? Is it a bunch of cocks hitting desks at the NSA as they all get erections at the thought of legislation being passed to make this [stopping Russia!] happen? What you need to do to stop the Russians from hacking (which was their only real influence, I hope you will agree) is enforcing that people/corporations/organizations who find bugs - anyone - report those bugs to the software maintainers so they can be fixed. But somehow, I don't think that's the kind of legislation that will be passed. I would wager that social media and fake news had influence as well. Give me a few examples of this fake news originating from Russia that was relatively widespread in social media amongst the US population, if you would be so kind.
I'm not sure what examples you're looking for but it's been widely reported that there was a full scale disinformation campaign.
|
On May 04 2017 02:48 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2017 02:45 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 04 2017 02:42 Mohdoo wrote:On May 04 2017 02:35 GreenHorizons wrote:Clinton launching PAC to act as 'quiet catalyst'
Hillary Clinton is reportedly planning to launch a PAC to act as a "quiet catalyst" for organizations she feels strongly about.
Axios reported Wednesday the former Democratic presidential nominee's PAC will also assist 2018 congressional candidates.
A source told Axios the PAC will work with organizations that rose up after the election of President Trump. It will also work with existing groups that were reenergized by the presidential race.
Clinton has already met with some of the groups, the source told Axios.
She will also begin paid speaking, the news outlet reported. Source And here we go. The quest to remake the Clinton brand as some kind of revolutionary cause begins. It's up to her former supporters to have an intervention, but I imagine they won't admit she's desperately hoping for a 2020 run until a couple weeks after she announces. Only people I know who legit want Clinton for Clinton are my batshit crazy mega-feminist friends who wear shirts like "The future is female" and all that crap. Its not going to take much for a huge majority of people to prefer someone fresh over Clinton. I also remain confident that Ellison will be disruptive enough to make a huge stink if the party starts drifting towards another pre-determined Clinton run. I wonder how capable Ellison would be at dismantling super delegates. My intuition tells me even if the party planned to get rid of supers, they would only announce the change some time in 2019 for the better optics.
My attorney is pretty cool and she doesn’t wear shirts like that. She doesn’t have the same relationship with Clinton that you do. Clinton was a role model to her in becoming an attorney and rising beyond just being a wife to her president husband. She isn’t irrational and doesn’t think Clinton is perfect, but she isn't some crazy militant feminist.
|
On May 04 2017 02:53 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2017 02:48 Mohdoo wrote:On May 04 2017 02:45 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 04 2017 02:42 Mohdoo wrote:On May 04 2017 02:35 GreenHorizons wrote:Clinton launching PAC to act as 'quiet catalyst'
Hillary Clinton is reportedly planning to launch a PAC to act as a "quiet catalyst" for organizations she feels strongly about.
Axios reported Wednesday the former Democratic presidential nominee's PAC will also assist 2018 congressional candidates.
A source told Axios the PAC will work with organizations that rose up after the election of President Trump. It will also work with existing groups that were reenergized by the presidential race.
Clinton has already met with some of the groups, the source told Axios.
She will also begin paid speaking, the news outlet reported. Source And here we go. The quest to remake the Clinton brand as some kind of revolutionary cause begins. It's up to her former supporters to have an intervention, but I imagine they won't admit she's desperately hoping for a 2020 run until a couple weeks after she announces. Only people I know who legit want Clinton for Clinton are my batshit crazy mega-feminist friends who wear shirts like "The future is female" and all that crap. Its not going to take much for a huge majority of people to prefer someone fresh over Clinton. I also remain confident that Ellison will be disruptive enough to make a huge stink if the party starts drifting towards another pre-determined Clinton run. I wonder how capable Ellison would be at dismantling super delegates. My intuition tells me even if the party planned to get rid of supers, they would only announce the change some time in 2019 for the better optics. My attorney is pretty cool and she doesn’t wear shirts like that. She doesn’t have the same relationship with Clinton that you do. Clinton was a role model to her in becoming an attorney and rising beyond just being a wife to her president husband. She isn’t irrational and doesn’t think Clinton is perfect, but she isn't some crazy militant feminist.
Yeah, I totally get that she's been empowering to women etc etc, I was just commenting on people I know. From my perspective, she simply brings very little to the table at this point. I really don't care what she's done for women. I am happy about and respect what she has done for women. But that really doesn't matter with regards to who I want running. I want someone who will have the highest chance of winning. And no, GH, you don't need to post Bernie's favorables. They are high, we get it 
|
I don't really see a problem with people viewing Hillary as a figure of female empowerment, beyond the more idiotic forms of "women who don't vote for Hillary Clinton go to hell" identity politics appeals. In general she is a respectably important figure for showing that women can rise pretty far in politics.
But she's genuinely shitty in and of herself which is where the problem lies. Whereas being a woman shouldn't be a handicap, it also shouldn't be a reason to forgive being a genuinely disdainful individual with little to no sense for effective policy-making and almost zero vision.
|
On May 04 2017 02:48 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2017 02:45 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 04 2017 02:42 Mohdoo wrote:On May 04 2017 02:35 GreenHorizons wrote:Clinton launching PAC to act as 'quiet catalyst'
Hillary Clinton is reportedly planning to launch a PAC to act as a "quiet catalyst" for organizations she feels strongly about.
Axios reported Wednesday the former Democratic presidential nominee's PAC will also assist 2018 congressional candidates.
A source told Axios the PAC will work with organizations that rose up after the election of President Trump. It will also work with existing groups that were reenergized by the presidential race.
Clinton has already met with some of the groups, the source told Axios.
She will also begin paid speaking, the news outlet reported. Source And here we go. The quest to remake the Clinton brand as some kind of revolutionary cause begins. It's up to her former supporters to have an intervention, but I imagine they won't admit she's desperately hoping for a 2020 run until a couple weeks after she announces. Only people I know who legit want Clinton for Clinton are my batshit crazy mega-feminist friends who wear shirts like "The future is female" and all that crap. Its not going to take much for a huge majority of people to prefer someone fresh over Clinton. I also remain confident that Ellison will be disruptive enough to make a huge stink if the party starts drifting towards another pre-determined Clinton run. I wonder how capable Ellison would be at dismantling super delegates. My intuition tells me even if the party planned to get rid of supers, they would only announce the change some time in 2019 for the better optics.
You know Ellison has no actual power in the DNC right? They just made up an imaginary position with no formal role to appear to be compromising. He has no real power to stop it other than perhaps speaking reason to the members and they just agree (highly doubtful for many).
Here's Hillary's 2020 strategy.
Spend some time being Trump's punching bag to engender empathy (hopefully pull up those dreadful favorables), then have a full primary hoping to spread the field thin enough to have a Trump like victory in a primary.
Shouldn't work, but it's the best she's got and it looks like she's going for it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
