Clinton: Polls Showing Sanders Could Beat Trump "Mean Nothing To Me" (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 24, 2024, 03:42:48 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential Election
  Clinton: Polls Showing Sanders Could Beat Trump "Mean Nothing To Me" (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Clinton: Polls Showing Sanders Could Beat Trump "Mean Nothing To Me"  (Read 1558 times)
Lyin' Steve
SteveMcQueen
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,310


« on: May 22, 2016, 05:41:48 PM »

Hillary admittedly has a point. She's been the subject of attacks from the national GOP and conservative groups for almost 25 straight years without cease. Bernie has had a few afterthought swipes from commentators and candidates about being an avowed socialist. There woud be tremendous opportunity, material and resources to drive his negatives way up if the GOP needed to, but it knows it won't.


All it would take is a few months of truth telling and education on socialism  and Sanders would be McGovern 2.0

Hes 74 years old and never had a chance in hell to beat Hillary .  

If Sanders was nominated he might just be the weakest and most humiliating candidate the democratic party has ever put up.  James Cox and George McClellan are the only two I can think of who might be weaker.  Cox did a perfectly reasonable job in his election and wasn't a damaging candidate, he was just kind of an inexperienced blank slate and got absolutely obliterated because the country was doing so well and nobody wanted to switch parties.  McClellan is one of the worst generals in American history, but he was hurt more by the asinine anti-war platform the democratic party put up and the withdrawal of John C. Frémont than by any ineptitudes of his own.  McGovern was a miserable radical as well, and his "just give everyone $1000" proposal sounded even more flatly ridiculous than Sanders' ideas, but he never truly gave away his dignity, embraced the label of an extremist, inspired and defended civil disorder in his name, or attacked his own party the way Sanders has, although the party absolutely despised him afterwards anyway for being such a bumblef**k.

On another note I'm happy to see Clinton finally getting more aggressive just in general.  She's been so uncharacteristically nice and inclusive this entire election.  I want to see a 3 AM phone call commercial and her deputies blitzing the media with Reverend Wright and cokehead Obama like they did in 2008.  Take your damn gloves off already girl!
Logged
Lyin' Steve
SteveMcQueen
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,310


« Reply #1 on: May 22, 2016, 05:59:14 PM »

Hillary has stopped playing games with Sanders.  She's frustrated at the fact that Sanders' numbers aren't falling off even though he lacks a path to victory.  Further, she wants him and his supporters to know that he won't be the nominee, and that they better get on board.

I'm, frankly, fine with her new tone.  Being gentle with Sanders and his supporters has only emboldened them to push back against her candidacy.  It's time to force them to confront reality.

The reality that they won't be voting for her, because rather than make any attempt to reach out, negotiate, or otherwise act like a politician, she's instead demanding to be crowned?


Sanders supporters have given up trying to get him elected and now all they want is for Hillary to kiss their ass and validate their delusions for a few weeks until Sanders drops out.
Logged
Lyin' Steve
SteveMcQueen
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,310


« Reply #2 on: May 22, 2016, 06:23:39 PM »


lol @ that article.  So Clinton says he's never had an ad run against him and your response is "yes he has, Martin O'Malley's super PAC ran an ad against him once and David Brock made some YouTube videos!"  I guess you've got her beat, Sanders really has gone through the gauntlet!

Hillary admittedly has a point. She's been the subject of attacks from the national GOP and conservative groups for almost 25 straight years without cease. Bernie has had a few afterthought swipes from commentators and candidates about being an avowed socialist. There woud be tremendous opportunity, material and resources to drive his negatives way up if the GOP needed to, but it knows it won't.


All it would take is a few months of truth telling and education on socialism  and Sanders would be McGovern 2.0

Hes 74 years old and never had a chance in hell to beat Hillary .  

If Sanders was nominated he might just be the weakest and most humiliating candidate the democratic party has ever put up.  James Cox and George McClellan are the only two I can think of who might be weaker.  Cox did a perfectly reasonable job in his election and wasn't a damaging candidate, he was just kind of an inexperienced blank slate and got absolutely obliterated because the country was doing so well and nobody wanted to switch parties.  McClellan is one of the worst generals in American history, but he was hurt more by the asinine anti-war platform the democratic party put up and the withdrawal of John C. Frémont than by any ineptitudes of his own.  McGovern was a miserable radical as well, and his "just give everyone $1000" proposal sounded even more flatly ridiculous than Sanders' ideas, but he never truly gave away his dignity, embraced the label of an extremist, inspired and defended civil disorder in his name, or attacked his own party the way Sanders has, although the party absolutely despised him afterwards anyway for being such a bumblef**k.

On another note I'm happy to see Clinton finally getting more aggressive just in general.  She's been so uncharacteristically nice and inclusive this entire election.  I want to see a 3 AM phone call commercial and her deputies blitzing the media with Reverend Wright and cokehead Obama like they did in 2008.  Take your damn gloves off already girl!

She has no need to take the gloves off because she's never really been in much danger. If she's trailing Trump in the fall, get ready for the fireworks.

Oh I know, I'm not saying she needs to right now.  Just that I want to see it.  I'm hungry for some good old fashioned Clinton war games, the inclusive mother-bird Hillary is boring.

Logged
Lyin' Steve
SteveMcQueen
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,310


« Reply #3 on: May 22, 2016, 06:26:15 PM »

This is the kind of attitude that might make her loose the election. Does she not know that this condescending tone just turns off Bernie voters from considering her?

What is she supposed to say? "Yes, he may be the stronger candidate?"

First you guys accuse Hillary of telling lies. Now she tells the truth and she's not being tactful enough. Some of these Sanders folks are so entitled, seriously. He lost. Hillary owes him nothing. And if it hurts your feelings when she assesses the situation honestly, it beats me how Bernbots could ever expect to actually face Trump from a position of strength.

Sanders has a base of support, whether Hillary and her team of establishment muppets like it or not. When she was in a similar position, she got State. What is she offering Bernie and his supporters? The same thing she's getting from them right now: a raised finger.

Are you implying Hillary would not have supported Obama if he didn't offer her a cabinet position?

I mean, the DNC and Democratic establishment treated Hillary and her supporters far worse in 2008 than they're treating Bernie and his supporters now, despite the fact that she performed far better than he did. People were constantly calling for her to drop out in the name of "party unity", very few people have called on Sanders to do so. Her supporters were constantly slandered as racists. They were also given no concessions in the platform and/or process which Sanders is almost certain to get, they were simply told to shut up and get in line.

So really, if anything, Hillary and the DNC have been relatively magnanimous and exceedingly kind.

As they should have.  This is presidential politics.  If you lose, you get nothing, go home.  Nobody is entitled to platform/process concessions or respect and deference just because they came in second place.
Logged
Lyin' Steve
SteveMcQueen
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,310


« Reply #4 on: May 22, 2016, 06:30:12 PM »

Jfern reminds me of those Japanese soldiers in the Pacific that continued to fight 20 years after WWII had ended.

I've never heard of this, got a link?
I know there was that submarine commander who was told to go on a suicide mission in England the day before the war ended and instead hid under water for two months to go try to defect to Argentina, and when he came up he still thought the war was on.  There were also some Nazis trying to set up a secret base in the arctic who lost radio contact, didn't know the war had ended, and were discovered by seal hunters six months after the war ended.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.031 seconds with 11 queries.