if she commits some type of gaffe (i can't really remember but she said a thing or two during her contests against obama in 08') it looks like sanders will actually have a decent chance at this thing. my head will probably explode if it's sanders vs trump. i can't even wrap my head around it at this point.
Yes, but 4 months ago he was expected to get trounced in every state; he would just get beat by less in NH and Vermont...
It will definitely be the world class schnoozer that was supposed to happen between Jeb and Hill with it getting down to the daily tiny gotcha and a few thousand votes in Fla, or Ohio,
Let's see what happens when the press (and Hillary's people) finish combing through Bernie's past. Many people will stop chasing the idea of Bernie and begin considering the actual Bernie (whatever that turns out to be).
I doubt they'll find anything in Bernie's past as bad as what she's going through with the either total incompetence or corruption while Secretary of State. I don't think Bernie is in any danger of getting indicted any time soon and she absolutely is.
Bernie doesnt strike me as the sleeze bag Hillary is. Bernie has conviction in his beliefs. Hillary will sell her beliefs to the most voters.
I don't see eye to eye with Bernie on just about anything, but I don't sense any lying in him. I feel like he means what he says and he's a rare politician that I think actually wants to help people......I just don't think his methods are counter productive and a bit naive.
You are really naive about how politics work if you think Ms. Clinton is incompetent or more corrupt than anyone with a lifetime in politics and multiple national offices. She has had literally thousands of man hours spent over 20 years trying to take her down. Investigating the Clintons is it's own industry. The emails are a technical faux pas that was probably the responsibility of some underling, but she probably consults 3 lawyers before deciding what to have for breakfast.
Who specifically do we have identifiable reason to believe is as or more corrupt than Hillary Clinton in this country? Feel free to name Democrats if you want to, because you will be hard pressed to point to a Republican who can hold a candle to her in this regard, except in your addled dreams.
I would say most every major office holder in the US is bought and paid for by their own corporate lobbies and vote against the best interest of their constituencies for corporate profit, political party power and personal enrichment. That is the standard operating procedure that Ms. Clinton is no more or less guilty of other than the fact that she plays the game very well.
Just that, and having a substantial power base among minorities, a better ground game, having a better run campaign and being one of the most gifted campaigners/orators of his era with a compellign personal story. I'll bet you (or anyone) any BBS bet they want that Sanders will not be the nominee. Signature, tipjar, what have you. Name your terms.
You are completely contradicting yourself. A group of lawyers would not have advise her to run a private email server for business. While I dont call it incompetence, I call it extremely shady and with no respect for the rules. You are too busy defending your precious beliefs and choose to accept the devil over admitting the people you believe who look out for your best interest are no different than anyone they are running against. Its one thing to say Clinton will serve this country better than any of the other candidates, ethics aside. Its another to blindly believe she gives two bits about her beliefs or yours.
Private business doesn't have to care about politics. Private email is a non issue. Clinton response to it is more of the issue than anything. The GOP insisting of it as an issue is also an image issue for the GOP. In the last day long hearing, the GOP came out looking stupid while Clinton came out looking strong.
LOL, a "technical faux pas"? Really? Is that what you're going with? There's more than one federal law that she was clearly in violation of....but sure, let's call it a "technical faux pas". Honestly though, how could you say she wasn't incompetent when she was sending thousands of emails with classified information through unsecured servers? Servers that easily could have been hacked and the information hijacked. It's gross incompetence when it comes to handling classified information and ANYONE who has been through even the very first part of training to handle classified information would know that....meaning that she knew what she was doing was wrong and illegal, she just chose to do it anyway so that she could control the emails and try to erase them. National security took a back seat in an effort to prevent transparency.
I know your strident ways, so my post is not meant for you as much as for general discussion. I have read a good bit, but I've yet to explicitly understand the claim that the server(s) were "unsecured" and that they "easily could have been hacked." Well, then they would have been. That's how the modern internet works. Attacks are pretty ubiquitous. I don't like Hillary very much now. I liked her in the early 1990's and supported her cookie comment and early work. I despised the vitriolic bile spewed at her from day one by the Limbaughs of the world. But I have changed my views on her over the years and am not a big fan. But anyway, in this email server issue, I see another complex rorschach pattern of a tricky, detailed situation, about which we have incomplete and evolving information. Those of the right (and I include bobby certainly) see the worst possible interpretation of that complex rorschach pattern. Personally, I just see a complex situation with incomplete information, and I definitely don't trust Fox news or our resident left-haters to interpret it for me. LOL.
I mean, they possibly were but it's impossible to tell because it was private servers. That's part of why it is illegal to mishandle classified information by sending it across private servers. You have to keep things on the correct government computers and send them through the correct government servers so that the chances of the information being hacked is incredibly low AND so if it does happen, they know about it. The excuse she was going to make is that the classified information was stripped of the markings so she didn't know it was classified information at the time.....but the email where she ordered a staffer to remove the classification markings of a fax and send it unsecured shows that removing classification markings was her policy when it came to mishandling classified information.....and doing so is illegal itself. There is no possible interpretation that makes ANY of that okay. There's no information that can come to light to make it okay.
