The strategy of response in a campaign is a matter of weighing options. Is a defense of a claim an admission that the claim has merit in the first place?
John Podesta has to go to a podium and vehemently deny being a part of a ring of pedophile Satanists that operate out of the basement of a pizzeria? Who would do that? Would you?
There's big difference between scurrilous, outlandish claims that few if any would believe, and serious, potentially believable claims that will sink your campaign if you don't address and deny. The Wikileaks dumps were never characterized as the former. They were most certainly the latter, left till this day as un-denied. Seems fairly damning, regardless of one's affiliation.
Apparently enough people believed the scurrilous and outlandish one that someone went to that pizza place with a gun.
So, in your eyes, HRC needed to go and deny every single "claim?" LOL. As if that would have made a difference to those who were never voting for her anyway.
Have you looked at the Wikileaks emails? Tell me those couldn't be faked or altered. Assange has claimed to be this crusader for fairness and truth, a comical claim of his own at best.
What claim sunk her campaign?
Well, you said it: "someone went to that pizza place with a gun", as in one person. You can always find a few nutballs who will believe anything. That's a far cry from millions of voters being persuaded to vote or not vote.
HRC had lied so many times no one would believe her denials. She was her own worst enemy, undermining her own credibility over and over. Even her sycophants in the media had to occasionally admit that truth.
If the emails were patently false, you'd think that they wouldn't fear showing even a few real ones vs doctored or faked versions, and using their symbiotic relationship with nearly every major media outlet to scream that from the hilltops. But they didn't. Not once. That alone says a lot.
I think you guys are giving too much credit to the factors that determined the outcome. It's not a matter of whether Russia did or didn't influence the outcome. The fact that they made an effort to do so is a hostile act, period, and if you are ok with that, then there's something seriously wrong with you. The USA should always condemn and retaliate against such acts.
Personally, I don't think Russia had anything to do with the results. It has to do with a new group of voters and the electoral college. The popular Republican vote for the past 2 elections has been 60 million, but Trump got 63 million. Those extra 3 million are not would-be Hillary voters that stayed home. She got the same amount of votes Obama did in 2012. Obama won in a landslide in 2008 for the same reasons Trump won in 2016 - they both inspired a new population of first-time voters that come out in droves. The liberal millenials did it for Obama. The back woods Duck Dynasty/Ted Nugent crowd who can't name 5 former Presidents came out for Trump. I'm on record here the day after Trump made the Mexican comment that he would win because those who also feel that way were going to come out in droves and vote for the guy who "finally said it."
[Edited on 1/10/2017 by BoytonBrother]
In the original post Kathleen Turner, who is a conservative but who is wary of Trump, questioned whether there is a double standard at work where Republicans have been quick to vilify Obama for representing a security risk because of his family history, yet when Trump's behavior and comments threaten national security many Republicans are mysteriously silent.
Trump has tried to deflect the above concern by arguing his dalliances with Putin had little impact on the election and the US Intelligence System is broken anyway. No harm done on the part of Trump.
But has there been harm done? When the Cold War was in full throttle there were two Superpowers--the USA and the Soviet Union. The US won the Cold War and the Soviet Union after losing most of its empire became Russia. Putin is trying to reconstruct the Empire by regaining old territory, like the Ukraine and countries in Eastern Europe.
By lavishing all this attention and praise on Putin, isn't Trump helping him reestablish the Soviet Union in the eyes of the world. It seems that this would be a great psychological victory for Putin. It is also a victory for Putin if Trump denigrates US intelligence and applauds the work of WikiLeaks, which seems to be Putin's main propaganda tool at present. How does any of this help the US?
I bitched my as* off here when Hussein won.But i damn sho didn't go out beating up people,crying,and goin to therapy to deal with it.
LOL!!! You only call him by his middle name to make some point, but no, he doesn't bother you one bit. What a joke you are. How about you be a man and tell us why you refer to everyone else by their first or last name, but single out Obama and call him by his middle name? Why is that Luke?
My middle name is LUKE and plenty of folk & friend's call me by that,while others call me by my first name.Even got an ol buddy from way back calls me by my last name. Why is that ya reckon? Maybe it's a conspiracy,to link me to Luke the physician in the Bible.
If you'll look up Mohammad's horses name that he is said to have rode into heaven on,just so happens ta be BARAQ,least that's what i read in numerous link's.Or Saddam Hussein,as his middle name is the same.Or would you prefer me to call him Obama,as sounds a helluva lot like Osama.
What are you getting at man?I'm wrapping my head around this so hard to try and figure out,,that i'm thinkin bout gettin a Hillary tapestry to hang in my kitchen next the Obama plates i bought back in 2009.
Luke there is a trial on right now in South Carolina where a white supremacist walked into a prayer session at a black church and killed nine African Americans. The case you mention has gotten plenty of media attention and outrage. Are you outraged by what happened in South Carolina?
Trump started the Birther moment and for almost 8 years challenged Obama's legitimacy as president. I would say that was a going crazy moment for Republicans.
We are not talking about whether Trump won. We are talking about this new move by Trump to be nice to the commies. It could be that you turn into a blood suckin night stalker if you don't come clean on whether or not you support this. It would be a hell of a thing to have riding on your soul.
Of course i was outraged man.Totally turned my gut.Those were God fearing,loving folk that were slaughtered.And i hope the sick piece of scum gets his due.As far as the coming clean birther gig.Man you go ahead and dive into that one as deep as ya like.Cause i don't embrace no dark mojo ridin shotgun with my soul. Stock up on them silver bullets man.
The back woods Duck Dynasty/Ted Nugent crowd who can't name 5 former Presidents came out for Trump.
Is this fact or opinion?
Two-thirds of the country didn't like the direction of the country under Obama, thought we were on the wrong track. Hillary Clinton didn't lay out any pathway much different than his. Do you think that may have been a determining factor in the election?
The back woods Duck Dynasty/Ted Nugent crowd who can't name 5 former Presidents came out for Trump.
Is this fact or opinion?
Two-thirds of the country didn't like the direction of the country under Obama, thought we were on the wrong track. Hillary Clinton didn't lay out any pathway much different than his. Do you think that may have been a determining factor in the election?
The reason that Obama's approval rating is about 60% is that people differentiate between him and the overall performance of the government which included the Senate and Congress both led by Republicans. Republicans in congress had about a 13 5% approval rating last fall. You can check out the stats yourself but your stats are inaccurate and so is your conclusion.
The problem was Hillary and not her pathway.
I presume this is your version that the Ruskies could not have done it?
These guys are obviously not buying the Ruskie hacks had no impact or Hillary done it stories.
Senators To Unveil Bipartisan Bill To Impose New Sanctions On Russia
Lawmakers, angered by Moscow’s alleged interference in the U.S. election process, have been discussing retaliatory action for weeks. But the legislation on sanctions that will be unveiled Tuesday goes beyond responding to Russian cyber-activity. It also mandates new measures related to Russia’s 2014 military incursion into Ukraine and its ongoing support of President Bashar Assad’s regime in Syria. The bill would codify some of the sanctions put in place by outgoing President Barack Obama as well as impose new punitive measures.
Ben Cardin, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and Republican John McCain, the Senate Armed Services Committee chairman, led the effort. They are joined by four Democrats (Sens. Bob Menendez of New Jersey, Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota and Dick Durbin of Illinois) and four Republicans (Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Marco Rubio of Florida, Ben Sasse of Nebraska and Rob Portman of Ohio).
If passed and implemented, the bill would lock in the executive order Obama used last month to apply sanctions against Russian intelligence services in response to their suspected role in election-related hacking. It would also impose a visa ban and asset freeze on individuals involved in cyberattacks against “public or private infrastructure and democratic institutions” and would sanction transactions with Russia’s defense and intelligence sectors.
The bill would authorize $25 million to the Department of Homeland Security to educate the public on the threat of cybersecurity and teach better online practices. It would provide an additional $100 million to the State Department to promote democracy, independent media and “programs to counter ‘fake news.’”
Is this fact or opinion?
Two-thirds of the country didn't like the direction of the country under Obama, thought we were on the wrong track. Hillary Clinton didn't lay out any pathway much different than his. Do you think that may have been a determining factor in the election?
No I don't. First, I'd like to see the exact wording of the questions as they were presented to the audience. Being dissatisfied with the direction of the country does not necessarily mean they are unhappy with Obama's performance. Another reason why I don't buy that, is because the Democrats received the same amount of popular votes as the last election, but the Republicans gain 3 million. See my previous post as for what I believe is the determining factor.
The back woods Duck Dynasty/Ted Nugent crowd who can't name 5 former Presidents came out for Trump.
Is this fact or opinion?
Two-thirds of the country didn't like the direction of the country under Obama, thought we were on the wrong track. Hillary Clinton didn't lay out any pathway much different than his. Do you think that may have been a determining factor in the election?
The reason that Obama's approval rating is about 60% is that people differentiate between him and the overall performance of the government which included the Senate and Congress both led by Republicans. Republicans in congress had about a 13 5% approval rating last fall. You can check out the stats yourself but your stats are inaccurate and so is your conclusion.
The problem was Hillary and not her pathway.
I presume this is your version that the Ruskies could not have done it?
Nah, it's the Russians fault. Let's stick with that.
The reason that Obama's approval rating is about 60% is that people differentiate between him and the overall performance of the government which included the Senate and Congress both led by Republicans.
Obama spent the better part of seven years in the 40's and and a pretty massive amount of seats were lost during his tenure. I guess that's a reflection of Obama's superior job performance as well as glowing overall voter satisfaction?
Keep blaming the Russians.....Please.
Is this fact or opinion?
Two-thirds of the country didn't like the direction of the country under Obama, thought we were on the wrong track. Hillary Clinton didn't lay out any pathway much different than his. Do you think that may have been a determining factor in the election?
No I don't. First, I'd like to see the exact wording of the questions as they were presented to the audience. Being dissatisfied with the direction of the country does not necessarily mean they are unhappy with Obama's performance. Another reason why I don't buy that, is because the Democrats received the same amount of popular votes as the last election, but the Republicans gain 3 million. See my previous post as for what I believe is the determining factor.
Why all the trouble winning elections? State, local.....everywhere. Why? Folks could be overjoyed with Obama and the Democrats impeccable behavior and job performance, but somehow it's not translated into election victories. Throwing out yet more excuses is not going to get them ahead.
Boyton sleeps better at night looking down on all the poor wretched Trump voters. He loves clinging to the the smug, arrogant, elitist, liberal persona. Hes worked hard to surround himself with not one single Trump supporter in his comfortable elitist bubble. Its all a bad dream to him, as America is now run by scary racists.
Boyton sleeps better at night looking down on all the poor wretched Trump voters. He loves clinging to the the smug, arrogant, elitist, liberal persona. Hes worked hard to surround himself with not one single Trump supporter in his comfortable elitist bubble. Its all a bad dream to him, as America is now run by scary racists.
And yet, you are quite justified staying in your liberal-hating bubble? How is that?
The back woods Duck Dynasty/Ted Nugent crowd who can't name 5 former Presidents came out for Trump.
Is this fact or opinion?
Two-thirds of the country didn't like the direction of the country under Obama, thought we were on the wrong track. Hillary Clinton didn't lay out any pathway much different than his. Do you think that may have been a determining factor in the election?
Two-thirds of the electorate didn't vote for Donald Trump. Math is fun!
The back woods Duck Dynasty/Ted Nugent crowd who can't name 5 former Presidents came out for Trump.
Is this fact or opinion?
Two-thirds of the country didn't like the direction of the country under Obama, thought we were on the wrong track. Hillary Clinton didn't lay out any pathway much different than his. Do you think that may have been a determining factor in the election?
Two-thirds of the electorate didn't vote for Donald Trump. Math is fun!
Trump's approval rating is approximately 37%. When he doesn't follow through with the promises he campaigned on, when people who voted for him wake up and feel hosed, when the middle class tax cuts amount to dribbles as opposed to big tax breaks for the wealthy, as more comes out about his inner circle and his comfortable relationship with Russia, we'll see how many of the Trump swallowers become disillusioned with and revolt against him.
Why all the trouble winning elections? State, local.....everywhere. Why? Folks could be overjoyed with Obama and the Democrats impeccable behavior and job performance, but somehow it's not translated into election victories. Throwing out yet more excuses is not going to get them ahead.
I don't think Republican voters turned out in 2008 because they weren't inspired by any of their candidates, and rightfully so. The recent Republican victories, everywhere as you mention, are from newly inspired voters who became repulsed by Obama. Your notion that some Democratic voters switched to Trump is ludicrous. The more Obama did his thing over the years, the more he inspired the right to turn out. That's how I see it.
Why all the trouble winning elections? State, local.....everywhere. Why? Folks could be overjoyed with Obama and the Democrats impeccable behavior and job performance, but somehow it's not translated into election victories. Throwing out yet more excuses is not going to get them ahead.
I don't think Republican voters turned out in 2008 because they weren't inspired by any of their candidates, and rightfully so. The recent Republican victories, everywhere as you mention, are from newly inspired voters who became repulsed by Obama.
Why would somebody be repulsed by Mr. Barack?
You've told us already.
The back woods Duck Dynasty/Ted Nugent crowd who can't name 5 former Presidents came out for Trump.
Do you really believe that?
Bless your heart.
Have you looked at the Wikileaks emails? Tell me those couldn't be faked or altered.
At least they were still around to be looked at.
The recent Republican victories, everywhere as you mention, are from newly inspired voters who became repulsed by Obama...The more Obama did his thing over the years, the more he inspired the right to turn out. That's how I see it.
That's pretty astute, but is it supposed to work some other way?
I won't get into a trolling match with you, but you have been implying that millions of Obama voters switched and voted Republican, to which I disagree with you. This isn't interesting enouigh to continue.
I won't get into a trolling match with you, but you have been implying that millions of Obama voters switched and voted Republican, to which I disagree with you.
Implying it how and when? I never typed it and I never even thought it. You have quite an imagination.
