I could care less what Trump "Thinks" that should work in my favor because Trump is often wrong and a disgrace to the modern republican party. Secondly, all you managed to say was that you agree with them that negative press is better than no press while I don't agree with that I never said anything to the contrary of it. So you arguing that point in response to my reply to someone who said Trump gets the most negative press and me proving them wrong is pretty much irrelevant just like your entire post is. You are acting like you've proved something when all you did try to change the argument something a lot of people do in D&D when they disagree with someone but know they have a weak argument.
I described Planned Parenthood as having ties to the establishment, which Hillary Clinton is a part of. They're not in her "pocket", don't put words in my mouth. And by the way, dismissing my points by characterizing them as "off-base" or "amusing" without any evidence (taking hypothetical opinions from people does not count as evidence) is pathetic and lacks substance. Look, Planned Parenthood can endorse whoever they want, but it bothers me when they receive budget cuts from congress and then decide to donate $1 million for a candidate who is already circumventing limits on contributions via state parties. They were already closing down some locations yet they're giving this ludicrous amount to a campaign. I don't get that. That money should have been used to fund Planned Parenthood facilities. They can endorse her fine, but why the $1 million for? At least use it for down-ballot candidates, that's where the power-struggle for Planned Parenthood is really taking place. And also, Hillary and Bernie are both very pro-choice, and at the time of the ad-buy, it was still before the first Super-Tuesday and in their donation statement the director of PP said "Hillary Clinton is the only candidate in this race who has made women’s health and rights a priority," I mean come on, that's just factually incorrect. They can say Hillary is the candidate most prepared to fight for women's health, but the "only" candidate? Bernie has a 100% pro-choice voting record and he doesn't even get lip-service? And lastly, Barack Obama IS a part of the establishment. He had the banks behind him when he secured the nomination. He wasn't antagonizing the way Wall Street operated to the extent Bernie has, he wasn't demanding that they be broken up. He wasn't criticizing the electoral process the way Bernie has. He was transformative only to the degree of his speeches' rhetoric. He may have pissed of the Republican establishment, but he was in line with the democratic establishment. That being said, he's done a decent job as president and being part of the establishment doesn't mean you're pure evil or anything. Look, saying something negative about Hillary or a lot of the D.C. organizations that support her is not always some grand Republican-born conspiracy that has taken hold of the far left. It's simply pointing out one of the many flaws in what could be our next president. She needs to held accountable by the public, especially considering she is someone who rarely holds herself accountable for her own actions.
You really don't understand anything about being a progressive true believer. The rigged system is one of the main targets of democratic socialism; the idea is to be democratic. Secondly, revolutions don't give in to the power structure. That's the passion of convictions. I am Spartacus, ha.
Your memory and logic has failed you again. You are the one changing the argument crack smoker. I said DNC and media is on her side. You posted an article against but the article you posted (I doubt you read it) said the opposite and that no coverage is worse than bad. I mean you basically contradicted and disproved yourself in your own post. That DOES go on quite a bit here. It must be especially hard for people who are defending Crooked Hillary to have Straight logic.
You realize THATS NOT THE OPPOSITE. When you have to fall back to name calling you know you're wrong. It's the reason I rarely post in D&D. You said the media is on her side I clearly showed she gets more negative coverage than any other candidate making what you said wrong, Im not sure how that's hard to understand. "Negative press is better than no press" is not the same as "The media is on her side", lol. Negative press is still negative press. You can argue all day that Negative press is better than none that's up to you I don't care but that wasn't what we were talking about. "As Media Matters has noted throughout the primary campaign, the coverage of Hillary Clinton has tended to focus on fake scandals such as her use of a private email server while her Republican counterparts have enjoyed more positive characterizations. This criticism has been backed up by a former New York Times editor who agreed that the publication has given the Clinton’s “an unfair ‘level of scrutiny.’” "Crimson Hexagon’s analysis, reported by Vox’s Jeff Stein, “shows that the media has battered Clinton more than any other candidate, perhaps because of the ongoing controversy over her emails.” "The biggest news outlets have published more negative stories about Hillary Clinton than any other presidential candidate — including Donald Trump — since January 2015, according to a new analysis of hundreds of thousands of online stories published since last year." http://mediamatters.org/blog/2016/0...ive-stories-least-positive-stories-all/209945 Again your statement that the media is "on her side" has been proven false.
I mean you owned yourself in two posts so nothing much left to do but laugh. I can now see why "you never post in D&D" tho. Sad!
How is the system rigged? He got less votes........hence, less delegates. You can't get only 10-15% of the black vote and 30-35% of the Hispanic vote and expect to win a Democratic Primary. Won't happen......EVER.
LMAO You're right about that, young fella. I call you young fella because you have the maturity of a 13 year old. You could post "nanana boo boo" from now on and it would make more sense than anything you've posted today.
I guess it's technically true when you include every story that mentioned Benghazi or Clinton's emails over the last 17 months as a negative Clinton story. Those stories piled up. That said, I have never seen a candidate get more unfair and negative press treatment than Trump. The media gave Trump $2+ billion worth of free coverage in the last year. The majority of that was pretty negative.
Assuming the superdelegates decide to vote for Hillary at the Convention and roll the dice that Hillary can defeat Trump, it will be interesting to see what Hillary offers Sanders. It looks like last time that in addition to helping Hillary pay off her campaign debts, Obama in the negotiations, probably offered her the Secretary of State position, which allowed her to remain nationally relevant and probably agreed to support her in 2016 if she chose to run again. As the two largely agreed on on most issues, that was not a matter at hand. Now what can Hillary offers Bernie or what will he demand? More important what can she offer that will make his supporters follow any sort of call from Sanders to back Hillary. There can be demands made that Hillary will advocate for $15/hr, free four year public college, a real national health care for all, not just Obamacare which helps about half of the previously uninsured and leaves them largely at the mercy of the insurance companies etc. Concrete steps to divorce the Dem Party and its officials from control by big money etc. I don't think Bernie really wants a position in her government and will not be interested in any sort of promise to back him for a future presidential run, given his age. The exception to this is that Bernie might agree to be her vice president if she agrees to the concessions above to help most Americans. There are reports Hillary has already offered to give Sanders a couple of slots on some of the DNC committees and I suppose the traditional speech. I think this is laughable if she thinks this will be enough.
I love watching the delusion among Sanders and his die-hard supporters that they have plenty of leverage. He'll get a few meaningless platform planks and nothing more. Majority of Sanders voters are not delusional and will vote for Hillary in the GE. The bros are irrelevant and can go pull the lever for Trump all they want, it won't matter. If Bernie stops his little toddler tantrum and gets in line to help elect Hillary, then he'll probably get some help retiring campaign debts, fixing his issues with the FEC and some meaningful role in the Senate democratic caucus. If he tries to make a stink at the convention, he will get nothing. When the Democrats get their Senate majority back, he will be sent to the proverbial corner until 2018 and then they will run a candidate against him to kick him out of the Senate. He already has a potential challenger (Al Giordano).
In the same way her campaign thread on a liberal forum is either the "fake email scandal" thread or the benghazi thread. New clinton slogan
I can't help but chuckle at the fact that Hillary won the nomination, and she knows who she's facing, and her supporters on this board still can't muster up enough excitement to keep a thread going for her. They just started in the Bernie thread and now moved to the Trump thread. Just dumping on Bernie supporters and now Trump supporters, rarely presenting positive positions for her. A microcosm of Hillary's place in this thing.
I almost never start threads. Do a search and see. Probably 3 dozen in 14 years, if that, and usually in Hangout when an asteroid might hit the planet (we can do nothing if one is headed our way, and that alone makes NASA and the space program worthwhile, but that's another topic). If no one else started a Hillary thread, then I was going to post in what seemed the most relative thread here. Sanders on the Democratic side (I am also being polite), and Trump on the GOP side, particularly since he wrapped the thing up. Nothing related to what you are carrying on about, with all due respect. I can't speak for anyone else.
Trump rarely says anything positive, so there's that. Everything is all negative, ban these people, build walls, start wars, drop bombs and his voters are angry so they love that. It's not negative press when it comes from your mouth and that's what you want people to hear. But I do get where you're coming from.
