Trump 2016 Or Hillary?
- Thread starter WhiteGuyintoThis
- Start date
I think the 47% comment really threw him under the bus!
GOP has no reason to stick with Trump: Christian Schneider
Christian Schneider 11:22 a.m. EDT August 5, 2016
Compare him to Churchill and you might end up crying like that baby he threw out of his rally.
Of all the talents bestowed upon men, none is so precious as the gift of oratory," Winston Churchill wrote in 1897. "He who enjoys it wields a power more durable than that of a great king."
"I know words, I have the best words," Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump would say in 2015. Trump later reinforced this indisputable point when he declared himself to have "a very good brain." (And to think over a century ago Churchill would warn of the "decline of rhetoric.")
In the past week or so, the brain of this verbal virtuoso has insulted the mom of a Muslim soldier killed while fighting for the United States, has publicly humiliated a mom who brought her crying baby to hear him speak and punked the congressional leader of his own party by not reciprocating his endorsement. Just in the last few days, Trump has suggested women should leave their jobs rather than suffer sexual harassment in the workplace, said one-time prisoner of war Sen. John McCain "has not done a good job for the vets" and declared that if he loses the 2016 election, the system is probably "rigged."
Yet among both Trump's supporters and those looking for justification to vote for him, one axiom still reigns supreme: A vote against Trump is a vote for Hillary Clinton.
And the response among a growing group of Republicans is, "So?"
In a strict sense, yes — either voting for someone other than Trump or abstaining from voting altogether will help Hillary Clinton's chances of becoming president.
But there are plenty of conservatives and Republicans who believe the election already is lost, and therefore aren't willing to sacrifice their dignity and principles to vote for Trump. For these conscientious conservatives, withholding their vote from Trump won't help Clinton win, it merely may aid her in covering the point spread. For people like me, a vote against Trump is a vote for sanity.
More important, it's not the #NeverTrumpers who got us to the precipice of this Lost Election. It's the suckers who believed that Trump was going to undergo a presidential metamorphosis after nearly 70 years of racism, boorishness and misogyny. Donald Trump clearly believes he got where he is because of these traits, not in spite of them.
Trump supporters enjoy pointing out that the election is now a "binary" choice. But the choice is between an untrustworthy political robot who has some experience working within the system and someone with the mental stability and temperament of a mean high school cheerleader. Hillary Clinton will be a bad president, but she will be terrible under some sort of existing framework. Conversely, President Trump's first executive order will likely be to convert the White House into a Waffle House.
Even the sole good reason for electing Trump — blocking Clinton's certain appointment of liberal Supreme Court justices — falls apart under scrutiny. Does anyone actually believe Trump is steeped in conservative judicial philosophy enough to appoint a justice willing to practice judicial humility? Asking Trump to properly identify a conservative jurist is like asking your dentist to perform your next prostate exam. And in that case, you at least get a new toothbrush out of the deal. (The best strategy seems to preserve Anthony Kennedy and Clarence Thomas in Han Solo-style carbonite and hold our breath until 2020.)
Christian Schneider 11:22 a.m. EDT August 5, 2016
Compare him to Churchill and you might end up crying like that baby he threw out of his rally.
Of all the talents bestowed upon men, none is so precious as the gift of oratory," Winston Churchill wrote in 1897. "He who enjoys it wields a power more durable than that of a great king."
"I know words, I have the best words," Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump would say in 2015. Trump later reinforced this indisputable point when he declared himself to have "a very good brain." (And to think over a century ago Churchill would warn of the "decline of rhetoric.")
In the past week or so, the brain of this verbal virtuoso has insulted the mom of a Muslim soldier killed while fighting for the United States, has publicly humiliated a mom who brought her crying baby to hear him speak and punked the congressional leader of his own party by not reciprocating his endorsement. Just in the last few days, Trump has suggested women should leave their jobs rather than suffer sexual harassment in the workplace, said one-time prisoner of war Sen. John McCain "has not done a good job for the vets" and declared that if he loses the 2016 election, the system is probably "rigged."
Yet among both Trump's supporters and those looking for justification to vote for him, one axiom still reigns supreme: A vote against Trump is a vote for Hillary Clinton.
And the response among a growing group of Republicans is, "So?"
In a strict sense, yes — either voting for someone other than Trump or abstaining from voting altogether will help Hillary Clinton's chances of becoming president.
But there are plenty of conservatives and Republicans who believe the election already is lost, and therefore aren't willing to sacrifice their dignity and principles to vote for Trump. For these conscientious conservatives, withholding their vote from Trump won't help Clinton win, it merely may aid her in covering the point spread. For people like me, a vote against Trump is a vote for sanity.
More important, it's not the #NeverTrumpers who got us to the precipice of this Lost Election. It's the suckers who believed that Trump was going to undergo a presidential metamorphosis after nearly 70 years of racism, boorishness and misogyny. Donald Trump clearly believes he got where he is because of these traits, not in spite of them.
Trump supporters enjoy pointing out that the election is now a "binary" choice. But the choice is between an untrustworthy political robot who has some experience working within the system and someone with the mental stability and temperament of a mean high school cheerleader. Hillary Clinton will be a bad president, but she will be terrible under some sort of existing framework. Conversely, President Trump's first executive order will likely be to convert the White House into a Waffle House.
Even the sole good reason for electing Trump — blocking Clinton's certain appointment of liberal Supreme Court justices — falls apart under scrutiny. Does anyone actually believe Trump is steeped in conservative judicial philosophy enough to appoint a justice willing to practice judicial humility? Asking Trump to properly identify a conservative jurist is like asking your dentist to perform your next prostate exam. And in that case, you at least get a new toothbrush out of the deal. (The best strategy seems to preserve Anthony Kennedy and Clarence Thomas in Han Solo-style carbonite and hold our breath until 2020.)
A conservative's case for Clinton: Gabriel Schoenfeld
Only Trump displays dark and violent impulses, and would toss our freedoms into the trash.
Many conservatives like myself find ourselves on the horns of a terrible trilemma. We are being asked to choose among three unpalatable choices: Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton, and sitting it out (by staying home or casting a protest vote). As a Republican #NeverTrumper, to those who have chosen to support Trump, I have nothing to say but goodbye. And to the growing number who are supporting Clinton, as I myself have decided to do, I say welcome.
Then there is the third group — prominent politicians, commentators and intellectuals, led by Mitt Romney and Jeb Bush — who are both #NeverTrump and #NeverHillary and are vowing not to get their hands dirty with either one. What should I say to them?
What I would really like to do is grab them by the shoulders, shake them hard, and yell “What is wrong with you?” But these individuals — some of them good friends — are also some of the most thoughtful and learned students of American politics that I know. Shaking them and berating them would have little effect, except to lower their opinion of me.
Reasoning with them would seem to be a far better course. But I am inhibited. To me it is obvious and irrefutable that Trump is a deranged, ignorant, bigoted, impulsive demagogue, who must never be handed the powers of the American presidency. And it is just as obvious that however terrible one thinks Clinton, one must do everything conceivable, including voting for terrible Hillary, to check the progress of a clear and present danger to the country.
But the #NeverTrump #NeverHillary conservatives see things quite differently. To them, as their leading theoretician, Matthew Franck of the Witherspoon Institute has put it, we are confronted with roughly equivalent evils. We are being asked to choose between two “ludicrously unacceptable presidential candidates,” both lacking a “single redeeming characteristic that recommends him or her to the presidency of the United States.”
Franck has no illusions about Trump, finding him utterly repellent: “Was there ever a candidate," he asks, “more obviously unqualified for high public office, as measured by his dearth of relevant knowledge and experience, his willfulness and self-absorption, his compulsive lying and inconsistency, his manipulative using of other people, his smash-mouth rhetoric and low character?”
But Franck weighs Trump’s character against Hillary’s and finds them equally balanced: her “much vaunted ‘experience,’" he writes, "is a career record of ghastly misjudgments in foreign policy, paired with a consistently authoritarian and illiberal ‘progressivism’ in domestic policy, seemingly intent on unraveling the social fabric that makes a decent society.”
I think some (though not all) of Franck’s indictment is overblown. But for the sake of argument, I’m prepared to accept every damning accusation he levels. Even so, Franck’s charge sheet makes no dent in my determination to work for Clinton’s election. Whatever foul lies and unprincipled avarice reside in her character and past, whatever abominable liberal policies she supports, whatever her borderline-criminal blunders with emails, and whatever undeniable damage her judicial appointments will do to the Supreme Court, she is part and parcel of the American liberal mainstream, with all its hideous carbuncles and warts. We conservatives have been fighting it — peacefully — for decades.
Trump swims in his own river of political dioxin. He neither cares for nor knows a whit about the Constitution. Asked for his views of congressional power as set forth in Article I of the Constitution, Trump responded: "I want to protect Article I, Article II, Article XII." The Constitution has only seven articles. Bottomless ignorance.
Freedom of speech and press are our country’s priceless jewels. Trump would toss them into the trash. “One of the things I'm going to do if I win,” he promises, “I'm going to open up our libel laws so when [newspapers] write purposely negative and horrible and false articles, we can sue them and win lots of money.” Farewell to freedom of religion, too: a religious test for entry into the country would spell the end of our regime of tolerance.
Following the Democratic convention, Trump threatened those who spoke about his character: “I was going to hit a number of those speakers so hard their heads would spin, they’d never recover!” Armed with the awesome powers of the American presidency, what monstrous consequences might flow from a man who displays such dark and violent impulses without inhibition? Asked what he would say to the grieving parents of Humayun Khan, the Muslim U.S. Army captain who perished fighting for our country in Iraq, Trump replied, “I would say we had a lot of problems with radical Islamic terrorism.” The lack of empathy — and arrestingly, the lack even of any sense that it would be politically expedient to display empathy — is the mark of a sociopath.
Only Trump displays dark and violent impulses, and would toss our freedoms into the trash.
Many conservatives like myself find ourselves on the horns of a terrible trilemma. We are being asked to choose among three unpalatable choices: Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton, and sitting it out (by staying home or casting a protest vote). As a Republican #NeverTrumper, to those who have chosen to support Trump, I have nothing to say but goodbye. And to the growing number who are supporting Clinton, as I myself have decided to do, I say welcome.
Then there is the third group — prominent politicians, commentators and intellectuals, led by Mitt Romney and Jeb Bush — who are both #NeverTrump and #NeverHillary and are vowing not to get their hands dirty with either one. What should I say to them?
What I would really like to do is grab them by the shoulders, shake them hard, and yell “What is wrong with you?” But these individuals — some of them good friends — are also some of the most thoughtful and learned students of American politics that I know. Shaking them and berating them would have little effect, except to lower their opinion of me.
Reasoning with them would seem to be a far better course. But I am inhibited. To me it is obvious and irrefutable that Trump is a deranged, ignorant, bigoted, impulsive demagogue, who must never be handed the powers of the American presidency. And it is just as obvious that however terrible one thinks Clinton, one must do everything conceivable, including voting for terrible Hillary, to check the progress of a clear and present danger to the country.
But the #NeverTrump #NeverHillary conservatives see things quite differently. To them, as their leading theoretician, Matthew Franck of the Witherspoon Institute has put it, we are confronted with roughly equivalent evils. We are being asked to choose between two “ludicrously unacceptable presidential candidates,” both lacking a “single redeeming characteristic that recommends him or her to the presidency of the United States.”
Franck has no illusions about Trump, finding him utterly repellent: “Was there ever a candidate," he asks, “more obviously unqualified for high public office, as measured by his dearth of relevant knowledge and experience, his willfulness and self-absorption, his compulsive lying and inconsistency, his manipulative using of other people, his smash-mouth rhetoric and low character?”
But Franck weighs Trump’s character against Hillary’s and finds them equally balanced: her “much vaunted ‘experience,’" he writes, "is a career record of ghastly misjudgments in foreign policy, paired with a consistently authoritarian and illiberal ‘progressivism’ in domestic policy, seemingly intent on unraveling the social fabric that makes a decent society.”
I think some (though not all) of Franck’s indictment is overblown. But for the sake of argument, I’m prepared to accept every damning accusation he levels. Even so, Franck’s charge sheet makes no dent in my determination to work for Clinton’s election. Whatever foul lies and unprincipled avarice reside in her character and past, whatever abominable liberal policies she supports, whatever her borderline-criminal blunders with emails, and whatever undeniable damage her judicial appointments will do to the Supreme Court, she is part and parcel of the American liberal mainstream, with all its hideous carbuncles and warts. We conservatives have been fighting it — peacefully — for decades.
Trump swims in his own river of political dioxin. He neither cares for nor knows a whit about the Constitution. Asked for his views of congressional power as set forth in Article I of the Constitution, Trump responded: "I want to protect Article I, Article II, Article XII." The Constitution has only seven articles. Bottomless ignorance.
Freedom of speech and press are our country’s priceless jewels. Trump would toss them into the trash. “One of the things I'm going to do if I win,” he promises, “I'm going to open up our libel laws so when [newspapers] write purposely negative and horrible and false articles, we can sue them and win lots of money.” Farewell to freedom of religion, too: a religious test for entry into the country would spell the end of our regime of tolerance.
Following the Democratic convention, Trump threatened those who spoke about his character: “I was going to hit a number of those speakers so hard their heads would spin, they’d never recover!” Armed with the awesome powers of the American presidency, what monstrous consequences might flow from a man who displays such dark and violent impulses without inhibition? Asked what he would say to the grieving parents of Humayun Khan, the Muslim U.S. Army captain who perished fighting for our country in Iraq, Trump replied, “I would say we had a lot of problems with radical Islamic terrorism.” The lack of empathy — and arrestingly, the lack even of any sense that it would be politically expedient to display empathy — is the mark of a sociopath.
Baiting the bull: How matador Clinton found Trump's weakness
American politics must be considered a true art form in its own right. In a 1962 letter to J.F Kennedy, liberal public economist John Kenneth Galbraith qualified, “Politics is not the art of the possible. It consists in choosing between the disastrous and the unpalatable”.
The tragedy of this art evokes Ernest Hemingway’s Death in the Afternoon published thirty years earlier. For Hemingway, Spanish bullfighting represented the ultimate tragedy played out before aficionados in the public. Unpalatable to some and disastrous for bull, matador or both, bullfighting is a microcosm of the American general election.
Like a great matador, a politician gains the affection of the public, tests and baits the opponent with skill, and wins the charge to its final conclusion. In this arena, Hillary Clinton is finally showing mastery.
Clinton shares her prowess with one of the greatest female bullfighters of all time, Chilean-born Conchita Cintrón- also known as La Diosa Rubia (“The Blonde Goddess”). Like Clinton, Cintrón thwarted the systems that prevented her, as a woman, from rising to the top of her field. In the heat of 1949’s Spanish bullfighting season, Cintrón defied both the rule against women competing on foot; and the presidente’s order that she not be allowed continue in the arena.
Dismounting her horse she simulated a ******* with grace and ease as the bull charged her, driving her point home to rapturous applause. Though she was immediately arrested, the authorities had little choice but to pardon her for her popular display of skill.
Nearly seventy years later at the 2016 Democratic National Convention, Hillary Clinton stood victorious before the nation as the first female Presidential nominee for a major party. But her real measure as a proficient politician lay in just a short few words of her victory speech, “A man you can bait with a tweet is not a man we can trust with nuclear weapons”. Matador Clinton has now finally realized that Donald Trump
can be baited into his own undoing.
And indeed he was. Clinton must have ultimately realized that asking Ghazala and Khizr Khan to speak, the Muslim parents of a slain American war hero, would fire up Trump. Khizr recounts how their involvement in Clinton’s campaign escalated over months since December- from being asked whether their public comments against Trump could be used in a tribute to their ******* at the Convention; to later being asked to join it; to finally being asked to give a speech.
This is not to suggest that Clinton had this in mind from the start, rather that by now it’s not difficult to see how Trump would react to the Khans’ speech once it was confirmed. This had the effect of baiting Trump by offering him the antithesis of his campaign positions, protected by bipartisan American values. In this case, a Muslim family protected by untouchable American patriotism: the red muleta to draw the bull.
The bull charged. Trump lashed out against the Khans and consequently suffered his worst three days yet. Lambasted for attacking ordinary, patriotic American citizens, Trump has faced devastating criticism from within his own Republican party. In seeing only the red, the bull became obsessed with it while the matador stepped deftly aside. As Hemingway describes it, for the “small lure of scarlet cloth” the bull is “not dominated or controlled, his charge is merely taken advantage of”. Channelling Conchita Cintrón, Hillary Clinton finally outmaneuvered Donald Trump.
Clinton will need to continue to use Trump’s destructive ******* against him in the upcoming months, and she will need to bait carefully in the Presidential Debates. But she has proven she can do so quite adeptly. She has a strategy to counter Trump’s own ability to twist kernels of the Democratic Party’s guilty conscience into offensive attacks.
And these have not been trivial. Trump has previously used Bill Clinton's infidelity to undermine Hillary’s feminism. He has called for Russian espionage against Hillary, the former Secretary of State in the Obama administration that suffered the fallout of the NSA surveillance scandal. He’s attacked the impartiality of a judge only for Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, a Bill Clinton SCOTUS appointee, to turn around and attack his candidacy.
Despite this, Clinton’s advantage remains that electoral mathematics favor her. However, she still needs to win the people's trust and pull Republican moderates and independents into her orbit. She will find it difficult to do this without baiting the Trump bull to fracture his support base. Clinton must know this, and after decades in politics leading up to November- she knows it well.
As American director Orson Welles wrote in the introduction to Conchita Cintrón’s autobiography, “You can’t keep a lady waiting forever, and there came an afternoon where she decided that she’d waited long enough”.
Olé, Hillary.
American politics must be considered a true art form in its own right. In a 1962 letter to J.F Kennedy, liberal public economist John Kenneth Galbraith qualified, “Politics is not the art of the possible. It consists in choosing between the disastrous and the unpalatable”.
The tragedy of this art evokes Ernest Hemingway’s Death in the Afternoon published thirty years earlier. For Hemingway, Spanish bullfighting represented the ultimate tragedy played out before aficionados in the public. Unpalatable to some and disastrous for bull, matador or both, bullfighting is a microcosm of the American general election.
Like a great matador, a politician gains the affection of the public, tests and baits the opponent with skill, and wins the charge to its final conclusion. In this arena, Hillary Clinton is finally showing mastery.
Clinton shares her prowess with one of the greatest female bullfighters of all time, Chilean-born Conchita Cintrón- also known as La Diosa Rubia (“The Blonde Goddess”). Like Clinton, Cintrón thwarted the systems that prevented her, as a woman, from rising to the top of her field. In the heat of 1949’s Spanish bullfighting season, Cintrón defied both the rule against women competing on foot; and the presidente’s order that she not be allowed continue in the arena.
Dismounting her horse she simulated a ******* with grace and ease as the bull charged her, driving her point home to rapturous applause. Though she was immediately arrested, the authorities had little choice but to pardon her for her popular display of skill.
Nearly seventy years later at the 2016 Democratic National Convention, Hillary Clinton stood victorious before the nation as the first female Presidential nominee for a major party. But her real measure as a proficient politician lay in just a short few words of her victory speech, “A man you can bait with a tweet is not a man we can trust with nuclear weapons”. Matador Clinton has now finally realized that Donald Trump
can be baited into his own undoing.
And indeed he was. Clinton must have ultimately realized that asking Ghazala and Khizr Khan to speak, the Muslim parents of a slain American war hero, would fire up Trump. Khizr recounts how their involvement in Clinton’s campaign escalated over months since December- from being asked whether their public comments against Trump could be used in a tribute to their ******* at the Convention; to later being asked to join it; to finally being asked to give a speech.
This is not to suggest that Clinton had this in mind from the start, rather that by now it’s not difficult to see how Trump would react to the Khans’ speech once it was confirmed. This had the effect of baiting Trump by offering him the antithesis of his campaign positions, protected by bipartisan American values. In this case, a Muslim family protected by untouchable American patriotism: the red muleta to draw the bull.
The bull charged. Trump lashed out against the Khans and consequently suffered his worst three days yet. Lambasted for attacking ordinary, patriotic American citizens, Trump has faced devastating criticism from within his own Republican party. In seeing only the red, the bull became obsessed with it while the matador stepped deftly aside. As Hemingway describes it, for the “small lure of scarlet cloth” the bull is “not dominated or controlled, his charge is merely taken advantage of”. Channelling Conchita Cintrón, Hillary Clinton finally outmaneuvered Donald Trump.
Clinton will need to continue to use Trump’s destructive ******* against him in the upcoming months, and she will need to bait carefully in the Presidential Debates. But she has proven she can do so quite adeptly. She has a strategy to counter Trump’s own ability to twist kernels of the Democratic Party’s guilty conscience into offensive attacks.
And these have not been trivial. Trump has previously used Bill Clinton's infidelity to undermine Hillary’s feminism. He has called for Russian espionage against Hillary, the former Secretary of State in the Obama administration that suffered the fallout of the NSA surveillance scandal. He’s attacked the impartiality of a judge only for Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, a Bill Clinton SCOTUS appointee, to turn around and attack his candidacy.
Despite this, Clinton’s advantage remains that electoral mathematics favor her. However, she still needs to win the people's trust and pull Republican moderates and independents into her orbit. She will find it difficult to do this without baiting the Trump bull to fracture his support base. Clinton must know this, and after decades in politics leading up to November- she knows it well.
As American director Orson Welles wrote in the introduction to Conchita Cintrón’s autobiography, “You can’t keep a lady waiting forever, and there came an afternoon where she decided that she’d waited long enough”.
Olé, Hillary.
anyone notice that the first part of the week when trump was on his own... he pissed off about everybody... dropped in polss... got nasty remarks from his fellow republicans...... but when Trump figured out he was in trouble.... he let the republicans start pulling his strings and telling him what to say and do... things got better...
which Trump is the candidate.... the loud foul mouthed offender...or the republican puppet.
which Trump is the candidate.... the loud foul mouthed offender...or the republican puppet.
I am still so utterly confuzzled as to WHY and HOW so many very patriotic Americans can be so supportive of this maniac with the bullying, mob-boss mentality. Like they MISS the Iron Curtain and want to replicate it on American soil? Very, very frightening. But then, if he IS elected, mayhaps we won´t have to pay for any wall. Perhaps the rest of the world will rapidly get busy building walls for us.
there are several right here!
Several of my closest and dearest friends. And ALL of them descent, kind-hearted, generous, hard-working folks! None of them even close to being anything like this egotistical, wannabe-tyrant they´re supporting unquestioningly, unfailingly. One of them actually stated that he cannot wait to get the arrogant dictator we have in office now out so that we can have a strong, uncompromising, hard-line conservative in office. I´m like what the WHAT?
Trump... just like Obama..... is not going to get anything done... unless it is benefiting congress!... as for Trump going to straighten things out... just not going to happen... true he can't be bought he has money... but no one has tried to buy a sitting president...congress is what is OWNED... and they only do what the lobbyist tell them to do.... so his great changes are not going to happen... they may give him a few.. but it will be give and take... that's why the Ryan thing didn't go as planned... Ryan has wants... Trump wants none of it
Right now he is just a snakeoil salesman.... scaring the whole world
and even with all his blowing and bellowing... he has shown no actual plan on anything... just that he is the only one to fix it!
and his biz record does not show that much success... sure have something built rake in some profits (short term) close the place and leave all the builders holding the bill... putting a lot of them out of biz... as for bring jobs back to America... right now he is asking for more work permits to hire foreigners at his place in florida... all the stuff he sells is made overseas... what jobs are he planning on bring in that he won't give to foreign workers?
and his biz record does not show that much success... sure have something built rake in some profits (short term) close the place and leave all the builders holding the bill... putting a lot of them out of biz... as for bring jobs back to America... right now he is asking for more work permits to hire foreigners at his place in florida... all the stuff he sells is made overseas... what jobs are he planning on bring in that he won't give to foreign workers?
No not right wing BS, I have spend a fair amount of time looking at the public record of the Clinton finances. Their entire fortune has been accumulated by selling political favors. What really amazes is that they haven't been indicted for some of the stuff they have done. While Hillary was Secretary of State the Clinton's and the Clinton Foundation received around 45 Million from businesses and countries that had business with the State Department. Don't take my word for it, go out and look at the records. As close as I can tell while the deal with the Chinese was being negogiated the Clinton's and their foundation received between 25 and 35 million dollars from various Chinese entities some that were obviously connected to the government. That turned out to be quite a bargain for China
True, a lot of politicians have gotten rich being politicians but nobody has ever been as cavalier as the Clinton's. They see politics as a road to wealth and little else. Did you know he lost the launch codes for our nuclear arsenal while he was president? And apparently didn't tell anyone for some time. Not the kind of mind set I would want to see in the White House.
Both parties would be a lot better off if they dumped their presidential candidates and ran the person currently on as Vice President.
Not much that comes out of Russia or China can be taken at face value. Anything they say has to be looked at in a historical context.
Can't argue that she at least acts saner than Trump. There are two big variables in the election. The first is what is in hacked emails that haven't been released? There must be something that at least has the potential of causing problems because DNC members have quietly voiced concern. The other is the release of the new insurance rates. Word has it that there are some very substantial rate hikes. These could prove to be a fatal 1-2 punch to Hillary's campaign.
Announcing insurance rates just before an election is one of the dumbest things I have ever heard of. Did the Republicans sneak that through when no one was paying attention? Or were the Democrats so supremely confident of the success of PPACA they did it? It could well be that final straw that keeps Hillary out of the White House
It seems that when the ******* hits the fan the public interest hang time is 2 to 3 weeks maximum. After that something else will draw the attention of the public. Some ugly emails and big insurance rate hikes could swing the vote as much as 15 or 20 points. Which is very bad for Hillary if that all happens a week to 10 days before the election
that's been going on for a year now... ALL insurance just not health care say they are going broke!... BS! I live in a state that gets a hike every friggn year... say it's tornadoes... finally they got denied this year and someone looking into... but anyway that's been in the works for a while now... election year just would be bad timing for Hillary... with Trump he has no plans on anything so don't see a change there
that's very true... but with the email thing... I am not that sure Hillary had her finger on the button... but don't know... I know she was pissed when sanders had been hacking for 2 or 3 weeks before anyone caught it... and after he apologized he still tried to steal some of her campaign people... so who knows
