Jump to content

Featured Replies

comment_2514323

As smoking guns go, it is kinda underwhelming.  So, back in 2015 the DNC was already thinking Hillary Clinton would be the 2016 Democratic nominee.  Well, back in 2015 everybody thought that Hillary would be the 2016 Democratic nominee, so why is that a surprise?  They had a clear front runner and they started coordinating with that front runner early with an eye to the general election. How is that a scandal?

 

Now show me some emails of the DNC doing something or plotting to do something against the Sanders' campaign and I will be shocked and outraged.  However, since this was a full blown hack of the type that you would expect to uncover all the dirty secrets and it didn't find any evidence of actual misdoings against the Sanders campaign, that suggest that no such evidence exist to be found.

  • Replies 27.3k
  • Views 883.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Most Popular Posts

  • And people wonder why I'm doing whatever I can to resist. To me, this is VERY personal. Never mind that my family and I have been good citizens for decades, that we've done some good for our communiti

  • I feel this needs to be shared.  

Posted Images

comment_2514355

As smoking guns go, it is kinda underwhelming.  So, back in 2015 the DNC was already thinking Hillary Clinton would be the 2016 Democratic nominee.  Well, back in 2015 everybody thought that Hillary would be the 2016 Democratic nominee, so why is that a surprise?  They had a clear front runner and they started coordinating with that front runner early with an eye to the general election. How is that a scandal?

 

Now show me some emails of the DNC doing something or plotting to do something against the Sanders' campaign and I will be shocked and outraged.  However, since this was a full blown hack of the type that you would expect to uncover all the dirty secrets and it didn't find any evidence of actual misdoings against the Sanders campaign, that suggest that no such evidence exist to be found.

 

Yeah. I'm not willing to give Hilary or the DNC the slightest benefit of ANY doubt. But if the hackers had found some real evidence, we'd be seeing it already.Were the DNC Powers That Be pushing for Hilary and opposed to Bernie? Well, duh. Everyone could see that. But if they did anything underhanded, they were smart enough not to leave evidence on a computer where the hackers could reach it.

comment_2514713

 I thought that Trump was a wealthy and successful business tycoon  ? Why can't he pay for his campaign ?

 

I've read various highly contradictory estimates of Donald Trump's net worth, including from Trump himself. His self-valuation includes what he sees as the value of the "Trump brand," i.e. the money he gets for putting his name on something, which he assumes will make people want to buy it or invest in it.

 

In any case, spending on a political campaign isn't like spending on a real estate deal. Trump can't anticipate a substantial direct financial return on his investment even if he wins the Presidency. Purely from a business standpoint, that's not sound financial practice.

comment_2514762
Two researchers released a paper (not a study) examining whether primary election fraud that favored Hillary Clinton had occurred.

 

WHAT'S TRUE: Two researchers (presumably graduate students) from Stanford University and Tilburg University co-authored a paper asserting they uncovered information suggesting widespread primary election fraud favoring Hillary Clinton had occurred across multiple states.

 

http://www.snopes.com/stanford-study-proves-election-fraud-through-exit-poll-discrepancies/

comment_2514775

 

Two researchers released a paper (not a study) examining whether primary election fraud that favored Hillary Clinton had occurred.

 

WHAT'S TRUE: Two researchers (presumably graduate students) from Stanford University and Tilburg University co-authored a paper asserting they uncovered information suggesting widespread primary election fraud favoring Hillary Clinton had occurred across multiple states.

 

http://www.snopes.com/stanford-study-proves-election-fraud-through-exit-poll-discrepancies/

 

 

Ten of the the thirteen states classified as being without paper trails are southern states.  Now I realize that "Former First Lady Of Arkansas Beats The Tar Out Of Vermont Socialist In Southern Contest" lacks something in the way of conspiracy theory draw, but it would be just as accurate of a name for the the paper.

 

As for the exit poll data portion of the paper, it has noted by other articles that Sanders does much better on election day than he does in write in ballots.  No doubt this conjures images for many Sanders supporters of Clinton staffers mailing in hundred of thousands or millions of fraudulent mail in ballots.  However running an election fraud on that scale without being given away by your own workers would be neigh impossible, and it is not necessary to explain the discrepancy.   Absentee ballots have long been known to be more popular among older voters than younger voters   Like absentee ballots, Clinton's popularity also skews towards older voters.  So Clinton's out performing in mail in ballots does not need some dark, difficult to hide conspiracy to explain.  Grandma mailed in her ballot two weeks before the election and didn't talk to any exit pollsters while the kids went to the polls in person and did.

 

Look, The only big surprise of the Democratic primary was Sanders' win in Wisconsin.  All of Clinton's victories were in line with what pre-election polling indicated that they would be.  None of Hillary's victories were considered upsets, I really don't know what if anything that I could say or show that would convince you that the election wasn't stolen by the Clinton campaign, but it wasn't.

comment_2515171

Went and found the Politico article itself...which was not easy to find oddly 

 

Frankly, if I were Hillary.... and had just been told what to do so publicly by the very group that others had accused me of being practically owned by, I'd almost feel required to get Warren or someone like her

 

Seriously, Clinton, if every there was a time to start singing "You don't own me" , now's the time. Otherwise, Trump is going to go to town about whose pocket you belong in and even those who hate Trump are going to wonder why they should get off  their butts and vote for you.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

Recently Browsing 0

  • No registered users viewing this page.