Damn post was lostPumped & dumped via concerted concern trolling. Poor Bernie! So Cheated! Crooked Hillary! He woulda won!
Shee-it- they practically joined the "Lock her up!" chant. So now we get Trump & it's all Hillary's fault. Everything!
Pumped & dumped via concerted concern trolling. Poor Bernie! So Cheated! Crooked Hillary! He woulda won!
Shee-it- they practically joined the "Lock her up!" chant. So now we get Trump & it's all Hillary's fault. Everything!
I voted for Hillary Clinton. No one tricked me.
I would have preferred to vote for Bernie.
But If Bernie was the nomination he would be the president. Because a lot of potential Trump supporters would have voted for him. And the Hillary people would not have seen Bernie as negatively as Bernie people saw Hillary.
But the DNC didnt think a jew could win. So they backed Hillary and denied Bernie resources and gave him no face time. They railroaded her in, thinking, this is our chance, Hillary is so desperate to be president, anyone can beat Trump. But the electorate rebelled and said we dont want this person.
Hillary had a desperation around her to be president, trying again and again and she seemed, to me, to think she was owed the presidency. Lots of people didnt like that. And she seems like the most fake person ever.
She just wasnt likeable and she lost because people like Donald Trump more lol.
The only person in the world who could lose to Donald Trump is who they ran. lol ok?
Not sure why you guys like her so much.
But its immaterial now. isnt it.
Precisely who said it's all Hillary's fault? I'd like to see that quote.
I voted for Hillary Clinton. No one tricked me.
I would have preferred to vote for Bernie.
But If Bernie was the nomination he would be the president. Because a lot of potential Trump supporters would have voted for him. And the Hillary people would not have seen Bernie as negatively as Bernie people saw Hillary.
But the DNC didnt think a jew could win. So they backed Hillary and denied Bernie resources and gave him no face time. They railroaded her in, thinking, this is our chance, Hillary is so desperate to be president, anyone can beat Trump. But the electorate rebelled and said we dont want this person.
Hillary had a desperation around her to be president, trying again and again and she seemed, to me, to think she was owed the presidency. Lots of people didnt like that. And she seems like the most fake person ever.
She just wasnt likeable and she lost because people like Donald Trump more lol.
The only person in the world who could lose to Donald Trump is who they ran. lol ok?
Not sure why you guys like her so much.
But its immaterial now. isnt it.
The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much it is whether we provide enough for those who have little.
The first theory is that if we make the rich richer, somehow they will let a part of their prosperity trickle down to the rest of us. The second theory was the theory that if we make the average of mankind comfortable and secure, their prosperity will rise upward through the ranks.
Almost all sophisticated tech comes from gov funded academia. Eg. semiconductors from defense grants to MIT/Stanford/etc, built on a foundation of theoretical and then applied quantum theory plus material science plus math/cs, and you know where the internet came from.
But the DNC didnt think a jew could win.
That had nothing at all to do with it. The vast majority of the country has no problems whatsoever with Jews. Hell the evil racist Republican Party has a "support Israel at all costs" philosophy. It's naive to think antisemitism is anywhere near as widespread as we're lead to believe.
I agree with the rest of your post though. Hillary seemed desperate and acted as if she was owed the presidency. If you asked any random person to name any part of her platform I doubt they could. No one could really figure out why she was running other than a desire for power.
For that specific example of semiconductors, do you have any numbers? Google/Wikipedia is telling me it was primarily a private venture at Bell Labs and I'm not immediately finding anything on the extent to which Bell Labs was publicly funded during that time. Accepting free money when available doesn't mean it was necessary, just the obvious business action to take.
For that specific example of semiconductors, do you have any numbers? Google/Wikipedia is telling me it was primarily a private venture at Bell Labs and I'm not immediately finding anything on the extent to which Bell Labs was publicly funded during that time. Accepting free money when available doesn't mean it was necessary, just the obvious business action to take.
It's quite material because the reason it happened is in the liberal brain defect and it will be necessary to fix that to be able to see it. But democrats it seems are also good at denial. Who want's to know your brain is defective.I voted for Hillary Clinton. No one tricked me.
I would have preferred to vote for Bernie.
But If Bernie was the nomination he would be the president. Because a lot of potential Trump supporters would have voted for him. And the Hillary people would not have seen Bernie as negatively as Bernie people saw Hillary.
But the DNC didnt think a jew could win. So they backed Hillary and denied Bernie resources and gave him no face time. They railroaded her in, thinking, this is our chance, Hillary is so desperate to be president, anyone can beat Trump. But the electorate rebelled and said we dont want this person.
Hillary had a desperation around her to be president, trying again and again and she seemed, to me, to think she was owed the presidency. Lots of people didnt like that. And she seems like the most fake person ever.
She just wasnt likeable and she lost because people like Donald Trump more lol.
The only person in the world who could lose to Donald Trump is who they ran. lol ok?
Not sure why you guys like her so much.
But its immaterial now. isnt it.
So... Everyone has a brain defect? Should we all just give up now?It's quite material because the reason it happened is in the liberal brain defect and it will be necessary to fix that to be able to see it. But democrats it seems are also good at denial. Who want's to know your brain is defective.
Anybody who didn't know her platform didn't care to know. She talked about it a lot, in between defending herself from a tsunami of slime that some Bernie supporters gulped down like a dog drinking antifreeze.
https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/
It pretty sad that people use the politicians ads to determine their policies. I suggest that's citizens malpractice.Hillary Clinton's 2016 campaign ran television advertisements more "devoid of policy discussions" than any presidential candidate since at least the year 2000, according to a new study published Monday.
The study, conducted by the Wesleyan Media Project, examined political advertising during the 2016 election. Among other conclusions, it found that only 25 percent of Clinton's ads focused on policy, while over 60 percent were personal, or as the study described, "solely about candidate characteristics."
Clinton is the only presidential candidate since at least the 2000 campaign, from either political party, to devote less than 40 percent of her television ads to focus on policy.
"In a typical campaign, ads that focus on candidate character have comprised less than 20 percent of total ad airings, and in some years like 2000, there were hardly any ads that focused on the candidates' character," the study stated.
In comparison, over 70 percent of Donald Trump's television ads "contained at least some discussion of policy."
"The majority of the Clinton campaign's negative advertising attacked Trump’s characteristics and personality," the study found, noting that "fewer than 10 percent of ads attacking Trump focused on his policies whereas about 90 percent was focused on Trump as an individual."
http://freebeacon.com/politics/study-nearly-all-hillary-clintons-tv-ads-didnt-discuss-policy/
It pretty sad that people use the politicians ads to determine their policies. I suggest that's citizens malpractice.
Hillary Clinton's 2016 campaign ran television advertisements more "devoid of policy discussions" than any presidential candidate since at least the year 2000, according to a new study published Monday.
The study, conducted by the Wesleyan Media Project, examined political advertising during the 2016 election. Among other conclusions, it found that only 25 percent of Clinton's ads focused on policy, while over 60 percent were personal, or as the study described, "solely about candidate characteristics."
Clinton is the only presidential candidate since at least the 2000 campaign, from either political party, to devote less than 40 percent of her television ads to focus on policy.
"In a typical campaign, ads that focus on candidate character have comprised less than 20 percent of total ad airings, and in some years like 2000, there were hardly any ads that focused on the candidates' character," the study stated.
In comparison, over 70 percent of Donald Trump's television ads "contained at least some discussion of policy."
"The majority of the Clinton campaign's negative advertising attacked Trump’s characteristics and personality," the study found, noting that "fewer than 10 percent of ads attacking Trump focused on his policies whereas about 90 percent was focused on Trump as an individual."
http://freebeacon.com/politics/study-nearly-all-hillary-clintons-tv-ads-didnt-discuss-policy/
But its immaterial now. isnt it.
Please. The thrust of Repub efforts was an attack on Clinton's character & her place in "the Establishment". The battle wasn't fought with TV ads but with free coverage of Trump rallies, Trump Tweet ravings & in social media. It was fought with fake news, Russian psyops, Bill's ex-lovers, Benghazi Moms & every sort of FUD that could be generated. He broke the mold of how political campaign are run, brilliantly exploited the shitty attitudes & memes that Repubs had built for decades.
He's a member of the financial elite, the true Establishment, in ways that Clinton never could be. He was born to it & has lived it recklessly to he hilt, won personal & financial battles leaving devastation in his wake. He lives to Win! in a way that disregards all other consequences entirely. Voters? He just grabbed 'em by the pussy... and they liked it, at least enough of them to win. We'll see how they like it as the new relationship unfolds.
In broad strokes, it is easy to understand what Trump's platform was:
- Ban Muslims
- Build a Wall
- Mass Deportations
- Protectionism
- Isolationism
- Drain the Swamp
All of these things represent a severe departure from the status quo, and a clear new direction for the country.
Did Clinton get out there and fight for Universal Health Care? Higher minimum wages and worker protections? Don't point me to some web page. She wasn't out there talking about these things and fighting for these things.
Yeah, he's awful. Historically unpopular from the very beginning. And she couldn't beat him.
You can say it's because of Russia, Benghazi/Email fake scandals, Comey, endless Republican mudslinging etc.
I say it's because she was a terrible candidate that ran a terrible campaign.
Have you considered that your memory is faulty? That she merely failed to overcome the signal to noise ratio?
I say you overlook the impact of Trump's charlatanism & Russian psyops on a voting public whose cognitive abilities have been crippled by decades of utterly insincere bullshit from the right wing noise machine. Trump saw that there was a lot of irrational seething resentment among Repub voters & exploited it magnificently. They voted for Trump because "He tells it like it is!" or at least he way their fevered & well propagandized imaginations believe it is.
Bernie? He said either he or Clinton were 100X better than any Republican, let alone Trump. Did his voters listen to him or did they fall for a campaign of concern trolling aimed specifically at them? Your own pronouncements indicate the latter.
Of course not, the internet has a pretty good memory though.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...s-hillary-clinton-want-15-or-12-minimum-wage/
http://money.cnn.com/2016/09/23/news/economy/hillary-clinton-donald-trump-health-care/
Clinton represents the two-faced liberalism that has dominated the Democratic Party. Nominally for progressive causes but ultimately under the thumb of corporate interests. Look at this shit:
EDIT: Link not working for me. Top result if you google "medium matt bruenig chelsea clinton"
Why are all these corps and business interests so interested in hiring CC? It's almost like the Clinton family is more aligned with corporate interests than the American people.
Trump's support was modest at best. He won 63mm votes to Romney's 61mm votes and McCain's 60mm. Trump got baseline Republican support. Clinton failed to energize voters and got fewer votes that Obama did in 2012. For all the stories about Sanders --> Trump voters and Obama --> Trump voters the bottom line is that the people that voted for Trump are the people that always vote Republican.
To the extent that Sanders voters didn't vote for Clinton, I think the perception that she was a lock to win the election is more to blame than any kind of concern trolling. The questions is, can you recognize any shortcomings in 2016? Did the D party nominate a great candidate? That that candidate do a great job campaigning? Is anyone that dares to criticize the party or the candidate just falling for a campaign of concern trolling?
Sweet freaking Jebsu. You claimed that Clinton didn't campaign on those issues & then provide links showing that she did, followed by all the concern troll memes you imagine to be sincere. Bernie's voters did tip the balance- by staying home & by being just as stupid resentful as Trump voters.
Want to know the greatest thing about propaganda? The victims can't tell that they're the victims.
WTF dude, do you really think she was that great? Forget Bernie, Trump, Putin and the rest. Hillary Clinton in a vacuum. Was she a good candidate?
Yeah, no kidding.