Clinton emails

[Danny Bateman]

Zoogs, I think you stated that very eloquently. I think the GOP is very unlikely to learn their lesson unless a resounding loss is issued, and now thanks to Comey and Rep. Chaffetz and the ensuing media freakout, I think that's unlikely to happen.

I'm just hoping for a Clinton win and a Democratic Senate so we can actually restore the Supreme Court to its full working capacity. The Senate GOP's inaction and obstruction there really grinds my gears and I hope they get the hammer brought down on them severely and wind up looking like the fools they are for pulling that kind of ridiculous stunt.

Any inroads we make into the House would be gravy, but it's hard to worry about that when you know you're fighting an unfair fight due to gerrymandering. Here's hoping redistricting in 2020 turns out better than the last go around.

It really does say something kind of damning about America when we can logically have compiled a list like Knapp did (or you dug up from Slate) about the side-by-side transgressions of the two candidates, and recency bias about some half-cocked, inaccurately reported email story wins out because it was very close to election day... and the polls begin to narrow.

People have the memory of a goldfish, sometimes, unfortunately...

 

[knapplc]

To be fair, when we have two Clinton regimes separated by 16 years, that makes the Democrats complicit in their machine, too.

Hillary could be so much more than she is. Unfortunately, she seems to be yet another career politician worried more about her legacy than guiding America.

 

[zoogs]

It's the Obama machine at this point -- but the Warren wing is asserting itself, which I think is an interesting and positive development.

Hillary, nor the Democratic Party will ever reach the potential they could in terms of American leadership so long as they are running against the modern-day Republican Party and particularly against Trump. Those are some very low standards to clear.

 

[84HuskerLaw]

Yet,still better for the country than Clinton.

This is just a football forum, but the lackadaisical empathy to justice I see here is more than troubling. I could care less about past administrations and their wrongs, the future won't change without accountability to the now.

Clinton is Old Boy Network politics and bad for America. She's not the person I would choose to run this country in a million years. She's qualified, and will do an adequate job.

Trump is not remotely qualified. He's bad. Scary bad. Like, possibly in the pockets of the Russians and has basically zero interest in running this country bad.

I can't imagine why sane, rational adults who purport to love Ronald Reagan and who are, by their own admission, Reagan Republicans, would vote for Donald Trump who loves Vladimir Putin & Russia and has said so openly.

Ronald Reagan would roll over in his grave if he knew what his party was offering America as a presidential candidate. It's baffling how we got to this place.

The only reason to vote for Hillary Clinton - the only reason, in my opinion - is that she's not Donald Trump.

Who's in who's pocket?

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/cash-flowed-to-clinton-foundation-as-russians-pressed-for-control-of-uranium-company.html?_r=0

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/clinton-foundation-millions-tied-uranium-report-article-1.2197173

I agree with you on Trump,he's said things that make my head hurt. I know there are people voting for him only because he is not Hillary Clinton. With the Clinton's we see a history of "questionable" cases ,from the whitewater land dealings to mysterious deaths of associates to where we are now. With Trump, maybe we get lucky and he surrounds himself with good people...maybe.

With Hillary, its a safe bet that we get more of the same.

No, in fact it is the safer bet that with the Clintons back in the Whitehouse with the full power of the Presidency for atleast a couple years until impeachment can finally happen, we will get worse that the scandalous crap of the past 30 years. There is every reason to believe the Clintons, upon successfully getting away with all the obvious to anyone with a brain crimes, will be even bolder, although it is really hard to fathom the outright gall of their activities. They really don't believe the law applies to them as they hardly try to hide the stuff. They are a crime family.

I just saw a news report that shows Chelsea Clinton has a publicly declared net worth of 30 million dollars! There ius absolutely no way she can have that without getting it from illegal activies. She has barely had any kind of job at this point in her life and certainly nothing that would allow to earn and save after tax that kind of money. Bill and Hillary have accumulated 350,000,000 after tax and after living the life of royalty after just 15 years since leaving the Whitehouse 'broke' according to Hillary. Neither have had any job except giving public speeches 'for hire'. Hillary wrote a book that sold less than 3000 copies upon being published and unltimately was paid about 5 million in advance royalties. That does not add up UNLESS you are conducting activities that even Walter White couldn't generate with his world class meth lab in full production! For the Clinton supporters, please offer any reasonable explanation please! Reports are that the Clinton Foundation has accumulated another 2 Billion dollars in it of which it is 'estimated' by the Clintons in the future they will spend as much as 35% thereof on 'charitable' functions with the rest going to fund the foundation 'staff' (the Clintons and a handful of their closest allies) and foundraising activites (Clinton jets and travel and living expenses while they travel and party all over the world). All this money was raised by solicitation of 'gifts' and 'donations' from foreign and domestic 'donors' who in return get incredible favors in return.

 

[knapplc]

Is google really that hard to use?

Ten seconds with google tells me Chelsea Clinton's husband is an investment banker, co-founder of the hedge fund Eaglevale Partners, managing over $300 million dollars. I think I may know where she got her money.

But hey, let's concern ourselves over the Clintons' money and ignore the fact that Trump has refused to speak at all about his money, where it comes from, who he's invested with, who he owes money to. That's irrelevant. The Clintons are a Crime Family!

 

[TGHusker]

Zoogs, I think you stated that very eloquently. I think the GOP is very unlikely to learn their lesson unless a resounding loss is issued, and now thanks to Comey and Rep. Chaffetz and the ensuing media freakout, I think that's unlikely to happen.

I'm just hoping for a Clinton win and a Democratic Senate so we can actually restore the Supreme Court to its full working capacity. The Senate GOP's inaction and obstruction there really grinds my gears and I hope they get the hammer brought down on them severely and wind up looking like the fools they are for pulling that kind of ridiculous stunt.

Any inroads we make into the House would be gravy, but it's hard to worry about that when you know you're fighting an unfair fight due to gerrymandering. Here's hoping redistricting in 2020 turns out better than the last go around.

It really does say something kind of damning about America when we can logically have compiled a list like Knapp did (or you dug up from Slate) about the side-by-side transgressions of the two candidates, and recency bias about some half-cocked, inaccurately reported email story wins out because it was very close to election day... and the polls begin to narrow.

People have the memory of a goldfish, sometimes, unfortunately...

I agree, good post zoogs. I will add this regarding a close election which this one appears to now be. If Trump looses, he might wash his hands of politics calling it rigged and corrupt and jump into his Trump TV. Even if that were to occur, I don't know what his mindset may be, it still doesn't take care of his followers who may need a bit of re-education. I think we end up wt a civil war in the party. I could see a 3 way split - the true Trump believers, the moderate/establishment types, and the constitutional focused conservatives who were weary of the establishment types before Trump came along and hijacked the party.

 

[Danny Bateman]

Zoogs, I think you stated that very eloquently. I think the GOP is very unlikely to learn their lesson unless a resounding loss is issued, and now thanks to Comey and Rep. Chaffetz and the ensuing media freakout, I think that's unlikely to happen.

I'm just hoping for a Clinton win and a Democratic Senate so we can actually restore the Supreme Court to its full working capacity. The Senate GOP's inaction and obstruction there really grinds my gears and I hope they get the hammer brought down on them severely and wind up looking like the fools they are for pulling that kind of ridiculous stunt.

Any inroads we make into the House would be gravy, but it's hard to worry about that when you know you're fighting an unfair fight due to gerrymandering. Here's hoping redistricting in 2020 turns out better than the last go around.

It really does say something kind of damning about America when we can logically have compiled a list like Knapp did (or you dug up from Slate) about the side-by-side transgressions of the two candidates, and recency bias about some half-cocked, inaccurately reported email story wins out because it was very close to election day... and the polls begin to narrow.

People have the memory of a goldfish, sometimes, unfortunately...

I agree, good post zoogs. I will add this regarding a close election which this one appears to now be. If Trump looses, he might wash his hands of politics calling it rigged and corrupt and jump into his Trump TV. Even if that were to occur, I don't know what his mindset may be, it still doesn't take care of his followers who may need a bit of re-education. I think we end up wt a civil war in the party. I could see a 3 way split - the true Trump believers, the moderate/establishment types, and the constitutional focused conservatives who were weary of the establishment types before Trump came along and hijacked the party.

With which of those groups do you most identify TGH? I think it's safe to say you're not in the true believer camp

I think I myself, as someone who leans left but isn't at all opposed to compromise, tend to appreciate the moderate camp the most. The far right seems just too uncompromising and unrealistic. They seem much less focused on actually governing so much as they do making a point and sticking it to people they don't like... be that the Democrats or the moderates in their own party.

Am I alone in this?

 

[funhusker]

Zoogs, I think you stated that very eloquently. I think the GOP is very unlikely to learn their lesson unless a resounding loss is issued, and now thanks to Comey and Rep. Chaffetz and the ensuing media freakout, I think that's unlikely to happen.

I'm just hoping for a Clinton win and a Democratic Senate so we can actually restore the Supreme Court to its full working capacity. The Senate GOP's inaction and obstruction there really grinds my gears and I hope they get the hammer brought down on them severely and wind up looking like the fools they are for pulling that kind of ridiculous stunt.

Any inroads we make into the House would be gravy, but it's hard to worry about that when you know you're fighting an unfair fight due to gerrymandering. Here's hoping redistricting in 2020 turns out better than the last go around.

It really does say something kind of damning about America when we can logically have compiled a list like Knapp did (or you dug up from Slate) about the side-by-side transgressions of the two candidates, and recency bias about some half-cocked, inaccurately reported email story wins out because it was very close to election day... and the polls begin to narrow.

People have the memory of a goldfish, sometimes, unfortunately...

I agree, good post zoogs. I will add this regarding a close election which this one appears to now be. If Trump looses, he might wash his hands of politics calling it rigged and corrupt and jump into his Trump TV. Even if that were to occur, I don't know what his mindset may be, it still doesn't take care of his followers who may need a bit of re-education. I think we end up wt a civil war in the party. I could see a 3 way split - the true Trump believers, the moderate/establishment types, and the constitutional focused conservatives who were weary of the establishment types before Trump came along and hijacked the party.

With which of those groups do you most identify TGH? I think it's safe to say you're not in the true believer camp

I think I myself, as someone who leans left but isn't at all opposed to compromise, tend to appreciate the moderate camp the most. The far right seems just too uncompromising and unrealistic. They seem much less focused on actually governing so much as they do making a point and sticking it to people they don't like... be that the Democrats or the moderates in their own party.

Am I alone in this?

Not at all. Following these threads the last year-and-a-half, you tend to speak my thoughts for me (makes responding to people easy when I just let you do it

)

I lean Democratic, but mostly for social issues. I'm for marriage equality (as long as churches aren't forced to officiate, which I don't ever see happening), I support pro-choice candidates because of the medical necessity in some cases, which means I'm also pro sex-ed and birth control to minimize the need for abortions. I also want to see our children, poor, elderly, and hungry be fed and have access to programs to help them as they work their way back to a life where they don't need those programs. I also want to see the most powerful nation in the world take strides to improve the environment and future for my kids.

I don't think that is a complete list of Democratic ideas I support, but the ones that move my needle the most. Other than those, I want a smaller government. I want that government to be efficient spending money. I want to believe in my faith without fear of oppression. I want to have a gun in my home for protection and gaming. If a Republican candidate would support marriage equality, admit climate change is real and needs to be addressed, admits "pro-choice" doesn't mean "pro-abortion", and doesn't demonize the poor because they take assistance, I'd have zero problem voting for that person; hell, I'd probably be excited to.

 

[zoogs]

Unfortunately, if a Republican candidate really supported half of those things, they'd be laughed out of the party.

I grew up thinking the Republicans were the smart and logical ones (not unlike 84HuskerLaw, incidentally

).

Safe to say I've been driven pretty far away.

 

[Danny Bateman]

Zoogs, I think you stated that very eloquently. I think the GOP is very unlikely to learn their lesson unless a resounding loss is issued, and now thanks to Comey and Rep. Chaffetz and the ensuing media freakout, I think that's unlikely to happen.

I'm just hoping for a Clinton win and a Democratic Senate so we can actually restore the Supreme Court to its full working capacity. The Senate GOP's inaction and obstruction there really grinds my gears and I hope they get the hammer brought down on them severely and wind up looking like the fools they are for pulling that kind of ridiculous stunt.

Any inroads we make into the House would be gravy, but it's hard to worry about that when you know you're fighting an unfair fight due to gerrymandering. Here's hoping redistricting in 2020 turns out better than the last go around.

It really does say something kind of damning about America when we can logically have compiled a list like Knapp did (or you dug up from Slate) about the side-by-side transgressions of the two candidates, and recency bias about some half-cocked, inaccurately reported email story wins out because it was very close to election day... and the polls begin to narrow.

People have the memory of a goldfish, sometimes, unfortunately...

I agree, good post zoogs. I will add this regarding a close election which this one appears to now be. If Trump looses, he might wash his hands of politics calling it rigged and corrupt and jump into his Trump TV. Even if that were to occur, I don't know what his mindset may be, it still doesn't take care of his followers who may need a bit of re-education. I think we end up wt a civil war in the party. I could see a 3 way split - the true Trump believers, the moderate/establishment types, and the constitutional focused conservatives who were weary of the establishment types before Trump came along and hijacked the party.

With which of those groups do you most identify TGH? I think it's safe to say you're not in the true believer camp

I think I myself, as someone who leans left but isn't at all opposed to compromise, tend to appreciate the moderate camp the most. The far right seems just too uncompromising and unrealistic. They seem much less focused on actually governing so much as they do making a point and sticking it to people they don't like... be that the Democrats or the moderates in their own party.

Am I alone in this?

Not at all. Following these threads the last year-and-a-half, you tend to speak my thoughts for me (makes responding to people easy when I just let you do it

)

I lean Democratic, but mostly for social issues. I'm for marriage equality (as long as churches aren't forced to officiate, which I don't ever see happening), I support pro-choice candidates because of the medical necessity in some cases, which means I'm also pro sex-ed and birth control to minimize the need for abortions. I also want to see our children, poor, elderly, and hungry be fed and have access to programs to help them as they work their way back to a life where they don't need those programs. I also want to see the most powerful nation in the world take strides to improve the environment and future for my kids.

I don't think that is a complete list of Democratic ideas I support, but the ones that move my needle the most. Other than those, I want a smaller government. I want that government to be efficient spending money. I want to believe in my faith without fear of oppression. I want to have a gun in my home for protection and gaming. If a Republican candidate would support marriage equality, admit climate change is real and needs to be addressed, admits "pro-choice" doesn't mean "pro-abortion", and doesn't demonize the poor because they take assistance, I'd have zero problem voting for that person; hell, I'd probably be excited to.

Thanks! Always good to know you're on the same page as somebody else. Convinces me my beliefs aren't that nutty after all

I agree with the bulk of the bold. I too would consider a responsible Republican candidate with those positions. I was all about Obama in 2012, but Romney would be a godsend compared to Trump.

Unfortunately, as Zoogs aptly put it, such a Republican doesn't seem to exist at the moment. Nothing the party churns out resembles that. And thanks to the insane mindset of their primary voters, if they did, they almost certainly wouldn't be nominated. That's what happens when the Tea Party taints the thinking of your base.

 

[TGHusker]

The Repubs most definitely need to expand their tent if they want to remain a national party that matters. The only perfect candidate is 'yourself' as you alone believe exactly as you do. Therefore the challenge is finding the person who displays the greatest # of values as you do and make the choice accordingly. The trick is discerning between true belief and just campaign rhetoric. I think this election would be much different if Kasich was the nominee. He was the most open to the items copied in bold in funhusker's post.

Sometime to get the things I want (prolife candidate), I have to give allowances in a candidate for some values that may not be a high priority with me.

 

[funhusker]

The Repubs most definitely need to expand their tent if they want to remain a national party that matters. The only perfect candidate is 'yourself' as you alone believe exactly as you do. Therefore the challenge is finding the person who displays the greatest # of values as you do and make the choice accordingly. The trick is discerning between true belief and just campaign rhetoric. I think this election would be much different if Kasich was the nominee. He was the most open to the items copied in bold in funhusker's post.

Sometime to get the things I want (prolife candidate), I have to give allowances in a candidate for some values that may not be a high priority with me.

Probably why I voted for him

 

[BigRedBuster]

I agree, TG. But if he wins, he captures, appropriates, and bastardizes the conservative movement beyond all recognition -- by capturing the Republican party and the loyalties of conservative politicians, as he has done.

So, the conservative movement will belong to him. Those who oppose will only recede into the margins, while their compatriots join.

But there's a chance for healthy conservatism to survive as an important political institution not stained with authoritarian, populist ethnonationalism. I don't know that it's a great chance. But it starts with a forest fire that can only happen if Trump does not prevail. The GOP does not control him, plain to be seen. It has been the other way around.

George Will agrees with you. He thinks a close loss would end up in finger pointing. A big loss would purge the party like vomit (my word - George is too refined to use it) of the Trumpism.

http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/george-will-gop-better-lose/2016/11/02/id/756718/

I think it's important to clarify exactly who we are talking about when discussing the GOP and who supports Trump. The GOP establishment did NOT support him and strongly considered ways to replace him as the nominee.

It's the "conservative" voters in the early primary states that the concern here. THEY are the ones that voted for him and gave him the momentum to ultimately win the nomination.

The party didn't want Trump. Trump didn't want the nomination. But...these early voters are what caused this.

This concerns me WAY more than if it were a party issue. This tells me there is an underlying movement of people who really do believe this crap and are willing to vote for it and fully 100% support it.

I think it's very important for the Republican party to some how completely move away from this Nationalist attitude while still hanging onto a conservative view on issues. That is going to be extremely hard to accomplish. They have supported and fostered groups like the Tea Party and various media outlets that have promoted these ideas way too long to just be able to flip the switch and make a 90 degree turn.

 

[Husker Red Til Dead]

I agree, TG. But if he wins, he captures, appropriates, and bastardizes the conservative movement beyond all recognition -- by capturing the Republican party and the loyalties of conservative politicians, as he has done.

So, the conservative movement will belong to him. Those who oppose will only recede into the margins, while their compatriots join.

But there's a chance for healthy conservatism to survive as an important political institution not stained with authoritarian, populist ethnonationalism. I don't know that it's a great chance. But it starts with a forest fire that can only happen if Trump does not prevail. The GOP does not control him, plain to be seen. It has been the other way around.

George Will agrees with you. He thinks a close loss would end up in finger pointing. A big loss would purge the party like vomit (my word - George is too refined to use it) of the Trumpism.

http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/george-will-gop-better-lose/2016/11/02/id/756718/

I think it's important to clarify exactly who we are talking about when discussing the GOP and who supports Trump. The GOP establishment did NOT support him and strongly considered ways to replace him as the nominee.

It's the "conservative" voters in the early primary states that the concern here. THEY are the ones that voted for him and gave him the momentum to ultimately win the nomination.

The party didn't want Trump. Trump didn't want the nomination. But...these early voters are what caused this.

This concerns me WAY more than if it were a party issue. This tells me there is an underlying movement of people who really do believe this crap and are willing to vote for it and fully 100% support it.

I think it's very important for the Republican party to some how completely move away from this Nationalist attitude while still hanging onto a conservative view on issues. That is going to be extremely hard to accomplish. They have supported and fostered groups like the Tea Party and various media outlets that have promoted these ideas way too long to just be able to flip the switch and make a 90 degree turn.

I think it was the GOP playing themselves. They didn't want a Rand Paul or a Ted Cruz, so whomever was polling better they backed them(trump) until the unwanted candidate dropped out. Remember early on how a Jeb nomination was basically a done deal, trump started polling better, all support for Jeb vanished. Then trump would say something stupid, and party leaders would retract support. The DC two step would keep occurring until we were left with a few choices and no clear front runner. The media loved that trump was leading ,all of the low info knuckle dragging dolts ate it up, and his stupid red hat. If the mainstream media helps him win the primary ,then they can destroy him in the general, it was an easy gameplan. He's done a nice job of helping them too.

The GOP made this bed,not conservatives, now they get to lie in it.

I see the DNC doing the same thing. Proof of party corruption to oust Bernie, just like the RNC did to Ron Paul in 08'.

Now they have Hillary, that might lose to someone shouldn't even win a city council seat. Trump would be decimated by Obama in a general, hell ,even John Kerry would beat trump. She was the best they could come up with, hedging their bets on the " first woman pres." vote.

Either way this next 4 years is gonna be a tumultuous $hitshow.

Sorry for the rambling rant, Im so ready for this to be done and over with.

 

[zoogs]

Yes, the GOP made this bed. The common refrain I'm seeing is that it wasn't like this in the HW days, and started with Newt's speakership -- I'm not sure how true that is. But certainly, they've relied on angry, uncompromising vitriol. And too often flat out misinformation.

Another term I've grown fond of is 'gaslighting'. It's been an extended one. Today, I had the misfortune of catching CNN put a Trump and Clinton spokesperson together to discuss Melania Trump's (very admirable, on its face) promise to address online bullying. Asked how to reconcile that with the man, Trump's spokesperson said "Parents teach their kids not to throw the first punch, but to defend" and somehow ended up with celebrating Trump's freedom to say what he wants, and his fighting for himself/America. Even I had to ask myself, am *I* the crazy one here?!?

Trump was an outsider, and wasn't preferred. But he just took over something that had been (unwittingly) built for him. The GOP built and made this platform for Trump, they just didn't know it. And we've seen the priorities of the establishment members ultimately laid quite bare. By and large, the current GOP power players are pretty on board with him. Show me evidence to the contrary.