Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Varelse

Hillary has already "won" the Dem Nomination

383 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Yamato

Expect Clinton to have Iraq, Libya and Syria shoved down her throat until she chokes on them. That automatically keeps Clinton on the defensive which means lose in every sense of the word.

How can Clinton respond to that attack? There is no good way to respond to it. Fail responses:

-Libya is better off now

-Iraq is better off now

-Syria is better off under ISIS than Assad

-Libya was a mistake

-Iraq was a mistake

-Syria was a mistake

Damned either way. Which means tap-dance around the answer which is also fail.

"There's no good way to respond to that attack". LOL

She won't have to tap dance, she'll know exactly what to say and she'll say it loudly in a pantsuit. Some of the business over there is unfinished. Iraq, Libya, Syria. Republicans are going to push her to new glorious heights in war mongering. Great thanks! It was righteous and just for the evil Qaddafi to go. Clinton stabbed Qaddafi in the back just as well. The evil cackle is one of the most bloodcurdling moments in US politics ever caught on tape. The rebels had a much easier go in Libya, haha! That was hilarious for the Dread Lady Rodham, Al Qaeda & Friends taking over a sovereign country like that. She's the war hawk of the Obama administration, she's going to have all the answers. She's going to know what we have to do, what we need to do, and what we must do.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker

Damned either way. Which means tap-dance around the answer which is also fail.

She'll probably just cackle and call it a Republican fear mongering conspiracy theory, she's used that one several times this month on different subjects. Outright refusing to talk about hard questions because she claims they are contrived. And the media backs her up on her ignoring those issues.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker

This won't last though. The media has positioned themselves to directly affect the nomination process through polling and controlling debates. So we will only see establishment candidates on the stage. Then 3rd party will begin to surge and they will clamp down on social media and the internet to suppress it.

I have to agree that the media directly is affecting the popularity of the candidates with their polls. Trump has remained on top because the media reports him being on top. It is like a bio-feedback loop. A self fulfilling prophesy.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Paranormal Panther

Biden is a continuation of Obama. No thanks. Sanders is getting 'Ron Pauled' by the media this time around. (The new 'old kook/crazy uncle')

Quite ironic considering Ron Paul and Bernie Sanders are good friends and former allies on many a piece of legislation.

By the media suppressing these two, and since the anti-establishment sentiment in both parties is increasing this sealed the 'anyone but establishment candidate' victory. Last time that meant Obama. This time it means Trump. At this point Trump could take a crap on the White House lawn and it would only increase his support.

This won't last though. The media has positioned themselves to directly affect the nomination process through polling and controlling debates. So we will only see establishment candidates on the stage. Then 3rd party will begin to surge and they will clamp down on social media and the internet to suppress it.

I agree with you up until the last sentence. A third party might rise. I think that the blogs and the internet will be safe, though. We'll still have our First Amendment to stop attempted censorship.

That's a good point about Paul and Sanders. They're two sides of the same "fringe" coin. The media will make sure that the fringe candidates, as well as their supporters, won't get too uppity. It's good to know that you see through their lame strategy.

The media demonstrate a confusing mix of arrogance and ignorance when it comes to their coverage of Trump. Their obsession with him is counterproductive too, as all of their negative coverage backfires on them, strengthening his popularity as the man who flips the bird at the media. He rises in the polls with each feigned outrage. The only way to hurt him is to ignore him.

It's heartening to read that you recognize the deciding role that the media play in most elections. They shape their coverage and their reporting to shape our perceptions of the candidates. If they talked about Kasich more than anybody else, he likely would be at the top of most polls. Of course, as can be seen with Bush, their strategy won't work every time.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Paranormal Panther

Trump is unafraid to hurl scorn in equal measure at Bush and Clinton and make it stick to boot. He's already proven the ability to do this time and time again.

He's tied Jeb! to his brother, Iraq and 9/11 like a big fat albatross to the point where Jeb! is sinking below even Chris Christie and Rand Paul.

Pulling back the curtain if Trump and Clinton win their respective nominations:

Expect Clinton to have Iraq, Libya and Syria shoved down her throat until she chokes on them. That automatically keeps Clinton on the defensive which means lose in every sense of the word.

How can Clinton respond to that attack? There is no good way to respond to it. Fail responses:

-Libya is better off now

-Iraq is better off now

-Syria is better off under ISIS than Assad

-Libya was a mistake

-Iraq was a mistake

-Syria was a mistake

Damned either way. Which means tap-dance around the answer which is also fail.

She might remain relatively unscathed since the Democratic news outlets will deny or downplay her misdeeds and mistakes. If Trump tells an ethnic joke, they'll highlight that more than any of her scandals, and they'll likely show a segment in which she berates Trump for his insensitivity to one of her voting blocs. Her much worse actions might not even be mentioned by the "outraged" anchors on the nightly newscasts. Many people won't see through this charade, and they'll support Clinton because of her gender.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Paranormal Panther

She'll probably just cackle and call it a Republican fear mongering conspiracy theory, she's used that one several times this month on different subjects. Outright refusing to talk about hard questions because she claims they are contrived. And the media backs her up on her ignoring those issues.

They were in the tank for Obama, and they're in the tank for Hillary. They have different rules for different candidates. If Cruz overtakes Trump in the opinion polls, the media will bring out more dirt and skeletons than your average archaeologist. Cruz suddenly will be seen as a dangerous religious fanatic who's supported by ignorant Evangelical fundamentalists, so let's make sure that the pro-woman moderate makes it to the White House.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Paranormal Panther

I have to agree that the media directly is affecting the popularity of the candidates with their polls. Trump has remained on top because the media reports him being on top. It is like a bio-feedback loop. A self fulfilling prophesy.

You hit the nail on the head! That's exactly what they do. Kucinich or Paul could have been elected president if the media supported them in the same way that they supported Obama. The entertainment establishment influences unquestioning people too.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jungleboogie

She might remain relatively unscathed since the Democratic news outlets will deny or downplay her misdeeds and mistakes. If Trump tells an ethnic joke, they'll highlight that more than any of her scandals, and they'll likely show a segment in which she berates Trump for his insensitivity to one of her voting blocs. Her much worse actions might not even be mentioned by the "outraged" anchors on the nightly newscasts. Many people won't see through this charade, and they'll support Clinton because of her gender.

If she survives debating Trump the media should give her the edge. A Clinton/Trump debate would be watched by damn near everyone even with the mildest interest in politics. So it would be a hard spin for the media if it turns into a Clinton disaster.

Clinton is what I call a 'droning' style speaker, doesn't modulate her voice well, and is not quick off the cuff. Romney, Rand Paul and Jeb Bush also fall into this category. Makes for poor debate performances, especially one on one where there isn't much time to think. She's had an easy time of it so far since Sanders also has no debating chops.

Same reasons George Bush mopped the floor with Al Gore on the debate floor. Maybe not intellectually superior, but quick off-the-cuff.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ellapenella

damn you're good !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Paranormal Panther

If she survives debating Trump the media should give her the edge. A Clinton/Trump debate would be watched by damn near everyone even with the mildest interest in politics. So it would be a hard spin for the media if it turns into a Clinton disaster.

Clinton is what I call a 'droning' style speaker, doesn't modulate her voice well, and is not quick off the cuff. Romney, Rand Paul and Jeb Bush also fall into this category. Makes for poor debate performances, especially one on one where there isn't much time to think. She's had an easy time of it so far since Sanders also has no debating chops.

Same reasons George Bush mopped the floor with Al Gore on the debate floor. Maybe not intellectually superior, but quick off-the-cuff.

It won't make much difference since Trump's supporters will stick with him, and Hillary's supporters will stick with her. It'll impact only the undecided, and even they might pick a third choice if they don't like either of the two main choices. Style does beat substance in many debates, but it's more of a factor in ordinary debates than ones that have two *very* polarizing figures with their own unwavering fans. Voters make up their minds before debates in those cases.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Paranormalcy

She's had an easy time of it so far since Sanders also has no debating chops.

I'd just like to disagree in the most vehement way possible without a duel at twenty paces being necessary. I feel like all the candidates have done well, and Hillary may be slicker but she is most certainly not "winning" the debates in any unanimous way among Democratic voters. I feel a few have been a tie even among all three Democrats, but I feel content-wise, Bernie absolutely annihilates Clinton in any meaningful way.

You may disagree but that essentially proves the point that you may say I'm biased for Bernie, but if that's the case, what causes someone to think they're somehow immune to being biased for some other candidate - that obviously some voters are just rubes and pick their favorite candidate and say they won everything, without any evidence - the very thing Hillary and the DNC and their media dictatorship is being accused of on a daily basis. I can appreciate some of the points you made, but you probably need to step back a little bit and reevaluate your own objectivity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ellapenella

I'd just like to disagree in the most vehement way possible without a duel at twenty paces being necessary. I feel like all the candidates have done well, and Hillary may be slicker but she is most certainly not "winning" the debates in any unanimous way among Democratic voters. I feel a few have been a tie even among all three Democrats, but I feel content-wise, Bernie absolutely annihilates Clinton in any meaningful way.

You may disagree but that essentially proves the point that you may say I'm biased for Bernie, but if that's the case, what causes someone to think they're somehow immune to being biased for some other candidate - that obviously some voters are just rubes and pick their favorite candidate and say they won everything, without any evidence - the very thing Hillary and the DNC and their media dictatorship is being accused of on a daily basis. I can appreciate some of the points you made, but you probably need to step back a little bit and reevaluate your own objectivity.

20 paces being necessary,hmm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ellapenella

How can you honestly say that all of the candidates have done well? I disagree with you right there.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ellapenella

I wouldn't say that Bernie annihilated her at all . I see it as she has done this to herself and whatever Bernie defends concerning himself against her I don't see him as annihilating her. In fact, he needs to go off about her every single time her freaking name is mentioned to him,even in passing by.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ellapenella

I dunno? I'm wondering about a few things concerning him. You know i like him but...there's some concerns I have about his ideologies. Damn it, why does he have to have those driven views of his, so immensely .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ellapenella

Hello Ella. I'm not sure he's a threat to Hillary anymore but who knows the way they manipulate polls. I know of one hardcore Rush/Hannity fan I work with saw the light and is planning on voting for the middle class. Trump won't be controlled and they can't control him so they're trying, and possibly with Trump's help imo, to hamstring his campaign while strengthening his brand.

Hey, about the polling? I'm going to try to express my thoughts,bare with me,if near the or when we're in the final vote for electing our President into office and the media has the polling counts shown on the stations,broadcasting them over and all,are they showing actual counts of each candidate and I don't trust that even if you were to say yes they are accurate counts shown on the media of the ODDS in favor for...what if the counts are not accurate and people panic and vote for what they think are the closest finale two? or am I being paranoid about this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2-B

If she survives debating Trump the media should give her the edge. A Clinton/Trump debate would be watched by damn near everyone even with the mildest interest in politics. So it would be a hard spin for the media if it turns into a Clinton disaster.

Clinton is what I call a 'droning' style speaker, doesn't modulate her voice well, and is not quick off the cuff. Romney, Rand Paul and Jeb Bush also fall into this category. Makes for poor debate performances, especially one on one where there isn't much time to think. She's had an easy time of it so far since Sanders also has no debating chops.

Same reasons George Bush mopped the floor with Al Gore on the debate floor. Maybe not intellectually superior, but quick off-the-cuff.

Agree except for one point: if you think back, Romney was declared the winner of two of three debates with Obama, oh he of the alleged golden tongue. Obama is fine as long as he has his TOTUS (TelePrompTer of the United States). Without it, he frequently stumbles.

Romney went south in the third debate only because a partisan moderator lied.

But that is water under the bridge.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ellapenella

I remember Obama mocking Romney about Putin and um bayonets.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ellapenella

What was that,that Obama was laughing at Romney about, regarding Russia ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Paranormalcy

Mitt Romney: “Our Navy is smaller now than at any time since 1917. The Navy said they needed 313 ships to carry out their mission. We’re now at under 285. … We’re headed down to the low 200s if we go through a sequestration. That’s unacceptable to me.”

President Obama rebutted Romney’s criticism by arguing that the quantity of naval firepower came second to their strategic roles and capabilities in the context of technologically advanced and modern military.

Barack Obama: “You mention the Navy, for example, and the fact that we have fewer ships than we did in 1916. Well Governor, we also have fewer horses and bayonets. We have these things called aircraft carriers and planes land on them. We have ships that go underwater, nuclear submarines. It’s not a game of Battleship where we’re counting ships, it’s ‘What are our priorities?’”

http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/horses-and-bayonets

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ellapenella

cool,thanks for the reminder there. But they got into it over Russia too. I think Obama thought he and Putin were friends, more or less. Romney seem to keep on about Russia,insisting that Russia was not our friend,that Russia will be problematic for us. And there was that little clip of Obama and one of Putin's guys when they assumed the mic's were unable to hear them or they thought they were off,not on.What did he mean that he had 2 yrs. left to do whatever is was and to tell Putin? What was that about, do you know?

Edited by Ellapennella

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yamato

All is not lost. We also have a billionaire who thinks that other rich people are great and smart, a guy who thinks he's worth $10 billion and who caters to upscale establishments for wealthy people, who is now the blue collar worker's champion! ?

R's should just admit it, they love this guy and they want to be "nice" to him. He seems to have some real skills in acting. What could be better than a slew of 8th-grader insults and funny clown faces?

TrumpFaceComposite_large.jpg?width=648&s=ie-354391

Edited by Yamato
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ellapenella

Nope,I don't think he's acting Yamato. I think that's all Donald.,right there^. Yep. You threw me off though about the rich folks being all elbows with him and stuff cause he said that rich people hate him,would he really lie about that like that? come on. lol But I do think that there are rich people who hate him & the feelings are mutual.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ellapenella

how would you describe the means in which he caters to them,like how so in an example of that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ellapenella

but, most of all I will always remember that she knew the truth about the attacks in Benghazi for about four days before she told the families that were killed over that, that some cameraman who made that movie, will pay for what he did, while standing over their coffins and knowing she was lying straight to their faces over their dead love ones cold bodies.What a wicked b****.

and we know she knew because it's uncovered in her private emails with her daughter. She absolutely is busted for lying to them like that,and she wants to be our president.

Edited by Ellapennella
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.