PDA

View Full Version : I voted for Hillary Clinton...



Tom Montgomery
05-17-2016, 04:35 PM
... in todays Kentucky Democratic Primary. Despite how much as I agree with the majority of Bernie Sanders' political positions.

Why?

I gave it a lot of thought. I have always been impressed by Mrs. Clinton in interviews and in her testimony before hostile congressional committees. I think Mrs. Clinton has the edge in political experience.

I also think in 2016 America she is more electable than a fellow like Mr. Sanders who is unabashedly liberal (I think Democrats must run to the middle to win in national elections).

This, despite her negative ratings in polls. Anyone who has been a high profile national politician as long as the Clintons is going to have high negatives in polling. But her opponent will also poll high negatives.

I would be happy with either Mr. Sanders or Mrs. Clinton as the Democratic nominee. But I just think Mrs. Clinton has the better chance to defeat the GOP nominee.

And I must say, the posts by the Bilge right-wingers over the past 8 months or so have convinced me that Hillary Clinton is the Democratic presidential candidate they most fear. ;)

Paul Pless
05-17-2016, 04:37 PM
And I must say, the posts by the Bilge right-wingers over the past 8 months or so have convinced me that Hillary Clinton is the Democratic presidential candidate they most fear. ;)
okay you may have just convinced me not to vote for jill stein in the general :D

Sky Blue
05-17-2016, 04:41 PM
I have always been impressed by Mrs. Clinton in interviews and in her testimony before hostile congressional committees.

I'm so pleased to hear this. The coming years should provide you with many more opportunities to be similarly impressed.

McMike
05-17-2016, 04:42 PM
Yeah, well, hooray for you, thanks for more of the same BS. It's now officially your fault the country will continue to suck, you're only marginally better than a Trump voter. Just sayin.

Also, Sanders polls much higher in a contest against Trump, It might very well be your fault he wins. Thanks again.

wizbang 13
05-17-2016, 04:52 PM
^
a yup

Tom Montgomery
05-17-2016, 04:55 PM
I'm so pleased to hear this. The coming years should provide you with many more opportunities to be similarly impressed.
No doubt.

As we have learned over the last 24 years, that is Standard Operating Procedure by the GOP.

Full marks for admitting as much.

Tom Montgomery
05-17-2016, 05:05 PM
Yeah, well, hooray for you, thanks for more of the same BS. It's now officially your fault the country will continue to suck, you're only marginally better than a Trump voter. Just sayin.

Also, Sanders polls much higher in a contest against Trump, It might very well be your fault he wins. Thanks again.So does this mean you will not vote for her on November 11th if Hillary Clinton is the Democratic presidential nominee?

If that is the case.... well, right back at you.

McMike
05-17-2016, 05:08 PM
https://cdn.meme.am/instances/500x/68419338.jpg

McMike
05-17-2016, 05:09 PM
https://cdn.meme.am/instances/500x/68419359.jpg

McMike
05-17-2016, 05:10 PM
Tom, if you wanted a pat on the back you should have done something pat-worthy.

Tom Montgomery
05-17-2016, 05:11 PM
^
Because I think she is the most electable of the two Democratic candidates and a Donald Trump presidency is too gruesome to contemplate.

CWSmith
05-17-2016, 05:11 PM
Clinton will get the nomination because of people who were afraid to vote for what they really wanted.

McMike
05-17-2016, 05:12 PM
Oh, I'll vote for her, like Mark Cuban said, the evil we know.

Tom Montgomery
05-17-2016, 05:12 PM
Tom, if you wanted a pat on the back you should have done something pat-worthy.
If I posted looking for a pat on the back I would be guilty of virtue signaling.

Gag me with a spoon.

Keith Wilson
05-17-2016, 05:13 PM
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CgqcKoyUUAAPUf-.jpg:large

Tom Montgomery
05-17-2016, 05:16 PM
Clinton will get the nomination because of people who were afraid to vote for what they really wanted.
Who knows yet if she will in the nomination?

I voted for Mrs. Clinton because I suspect what I really want is not yet electable in 2016 America.

I am confident the Democratic base will be a counter-weight on Mrs. Clinton's conservative leanings. Frankly, I think she has more liberal tendencies than her husband. The right-wing in America certainly fears her.

McMike
05-17-2016, 05:17 PM
Polls suggest otherwise (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_sanders-5565.html#!), with a wide margin.

Tom Montgomery
05-17-2016, 05:18 PM
Early, early, early.

Governing by poll results is ridiculous. So is voting based on poll results.

Trump has virtually no support at all in the African American community or in the Hispanic American community. He also comes up short among female Americans.

That spells defeat in 2016.

McMike
05-17-2016, 05:20 PM
Who knows yet if she will in the nomination?

I voted for Mrs. Clinton because I suspect what I really want is not yet electable in 2016 America.

Then you are ill-informed.

Tom Montgomery
05-17-2016, 05:22 PM
Your disagreement with my opinion is noted.

We will both see who is correct on 11/11/16.

McMike
05-17-2016, 05:26 PM
Your disagreement with my opinion is noted.

We will both see who is correct on 11/11/16.

Thanks for not ignoring me. That was real swell of you.

Ian McColgin
05-17-2016, 05:32 PM
Well written, Tom.

Tom Montgomery
05-17-2016, 05:32 PM
As for being a "progressive...."

I have voted for Republicans in 5 of the last 11 presidential elections. I was once a registered Republican and subscribed to William F. Buckley's New Republic
magazine.

Ronald Reagan and the New Republic (among other right-wing publications) convinced me that the GOP was heading toward the irresponsible extremism we see today. So I abandoned the GOP and became a Democrat. Today I will not vote for any Republican on any level of government until they get their act together. And I suspect that may never happen. I can see the GOP going the way of the Whig Party.

I am not a "liberal" regarding every issue. I am a social liberal. I consider myself a moderate concerning Defense and Economics.

I am sorry to be such a crushingly disappointing Democrat for some of my friends on the WBF.

John of Phoenix
05-17-2016, 05:35 PM
I'm gonna vote for Trump. I'm sick of this slow, mediocre, agonizing slide into obliteration.

"Let's get'er done."

McMike
05-17-2016, 05:40 PM
I can imagine what a moderate concerning defense is all about but I have no idea what you would consider a moderate concerning economics would be. So far, there hasn't been any moderates in office concerning economics in the last 30 years.

McMike
05-17-2016, 05:41 PM
I'm gonna vote for Trump. I'm sick of this slow, mediocre, agonizing slide into obliteration.

"Let's get'er done."

I've often gotten mad enough to utter the same threat in total frustration but would never follow through with it.

Tom Montgomery
05-17-2016, 05:52 PM
By "moderate" in economics I mean that I think government should generally work toward accommodating private enterprise whenever possible.

By "whenever possible" I mean that monopolies should continue to be quashed in the interest of free enterprise; the EPA should continue to be unobstructed in their efforts; international trade agreements should be enacted only when protectionism is eliminated by the partners to the agreements; Keynesian government spending should be employed to counter recessions; government should strategically target key American industries for promotion and subsidy; and finally, single-payer health insurance should be legislated so American industry may finally compete on a level playing field with the other industrialized societies in the world.

The above is not meant to be an exclusive list of economic initiatives I support. For instance... certainly tax reform is necessary to result both in a fairer system where everyone (that includes corporations the SCOTUS considers to be "people") pay their fair share AND to allow a more reasonable revenue to the Federal Government to cover legally legislated expenses.

McMike
05-17-2016, 06:02 PM
By "moderate" in economics I mean that I think government should generally work toward accommodating private enterprise whenever possible.

By "whenever possible" I mean that monopolies should continue to be squashed in the interest of free enterprise; the EPA should continue to be unobstructed in their efforts; international trade agreements should be enacted only when protectionism is eliminated by the partners to the agreements; Keynesian government spending should be employed to counter recessions; government should strategically target key American industries for promotion and subsidy; and finally, single-payer health insurance should be legislated so American industry may finally compete on a level playing field with the other industrialized societies in the world.

The above is not meant to be an exclusive list of economic initiatives I support. Certainly tax reform is necessary to result both in a fairer system where everyone (that includes corporations the SCOTUS considers to be "people") pay their fair share AND to allow a more reasonable revenue to the Federal Government to cover legally legislated expenses.

. . . With that, I am completely mystified as to why you'd vote for HC other than your already dis-proven elect-ability excuse.

Tom Montgomery
05-17-2016, 06:04 PM
Disproven?

McMike
05-17-2016, 06:08 PM
Disproven?

Sander's elect-ability has been the BS reasoning for not supporting him ever since he started making serious waves. Another HC lie.

Tom Montgomery
05-17-2016, 06:09 PM
BS?

Yanno.... you have been border line rude in this thread. I give you more slack than I would someone on the other side of the political spectrum.

Maybe you should step back and take a breath?

McMike
05-17-2016, 06:24 PM
BS?

Yanno.... you have been border line rude in this thread. I give you more slack than I would someone on the other side of the political spectrum.

Maybe you should step back and take a breath?

Right, rude . . . so I misread your intent? You wanted to make a post, unchallenged, to what end? I do rude extremely well and, possibly, to liberally in my life; this was not rude. Your thin skin is noted, please refrain from starting conversations you really don't want to have in the future, it's very frustrating, from my point of view, to have the door slammed in my face when I was simply participating as I thought you you were inviting.

Guess you only wanted a pat on the back after all.
.

Tom Montgomery
05-17-2016, 06:26 PM
Right, rude . . . so I misread your intent? You wanted to make a post, unchallenged, to what end? I do rude extremely well and, possibly, to liberally in my life; this was not rude. Your thin skin is noted, please refrain from starting conversations you really don't want to have in the future, it's very frustrating, from my point of view, to have the door slammed in my face when I was simply participating as I thought you you were inviting.

Guess you only wanted a pat on the back after all.
.
Really?

Maybe you and I should simply agree to disagree... and maybe ignore each other?

McMike
05-17-2016, 06:27 PM
Really?

Maybe you and I should simply agree to disagree... and maybe ignore each other?

As you wish.

Tom Montgomery
05-17-2016, 06:28 PM
Whew!

Keith Wilson
05-17-2016, 06:33 PM
My goodness - two good guys, who likely agree with each other on 90% of the issues, voting for rival candidates who also agree on about 90% of the issues (OK, well, maybe 85%), and agree with those of the other party on about 0.2%. And still a surprising amount of ill will. Sometimes I hate politics.

Tom Montgomery
05-17-2016, 06:39 PM
No ill will on my part.

Sometimes passion overcomes moderate temperament.

Been there, done that.

McMike
05-17-2016, 06:47 PM
My goodness - two good guys, who likely agree with each other on 90% of the issues, voting for rival candidates who also agree on about 90% of the issues (OK, well, maybe 85%), and agree with those of the other party on about 0.2%. And still a surprising amount of ill will. Sometimes I hate politics.

There is that much at stake Keith, and I totally disagree with 85% alike. Sanders, if elected, would not accomplish most of his ideas, however, him being elected would be a huge symbolic win for progressive ideas and against the fear and hate of the Republican party. FWIW, no one here has addressed the reality that if HC wins the presidency, she will likely be more obstructed than Obama and that likely means less will get done. Sanders could have, at least, ignited a large opposition among the people against the oligarchy and the ultra-conservative ideas running amuck in Washington, HC will not. Honestly, I think this only delays the inevitable, there will be a massive rejection of the status quo when it's realized that 4-8 more years of no progress has made working folks poorer and less empowered.

Tom Montgomery
05-17-2016, 06:52 PM
Oh, I'll vote for her, like Mark Cuban said, the evil we know.
Enuff sed.

And if every Sanders supporter does the same on 11/11/16 the Democratic party candidate will be elected POTUS once again.

Compromise is the basis of effective governance. That is a concept completely foreign to the 21st century Republican Party.

Let us not fall into their trap of insisting upon ideological purity.
.

McMike
05-17-2016, 06:56 PM
Enuff sed.

And if every Sanders supporter does the same on 11/11/16 the Democratic party candidate will be elected POTUS once again.

I thought we were ignoring each other? Seriously, you couldn't last 20 minutes?! Admit it, you love me!!! :d

SMARTINSEN
05-17-2016, 06:57 PM
Sanders will not get elected, because he will not be the nominee. He cannot win a majority of the elected delegates, and his inability to woo the super delegates so far makes a pretty good predictor of the final outcome. The sooner he acknowledges this, the sooner the Democrats can get on with the task dispatching the short fingered vulgarian.

CWSmith
05-17-2016, 06:58 PM
... the short fingered vulgarian.

That is a phrase I'd like to see catch on., :)

Reynard38
05-17-2016, 07:01 PM
Trump vs The Great Pumpkin, who woulda thunk it'd come to this.

http://i1379.photobucket.com/albums/ah159/mark_ritter1/image_zpsrnsz2nan.jpeg (http://s1379.photobucket.com/user/mark_ritter1/media/image_zpsrnsz2nan.jpeg.html)

Tom Montgomery
05-17-2016, 07:03 PM
I thought we were ignoring each other? Seriously, you couldn't last 20 minutes?! Admit it, you love me!!! :d
I love all Democratic voters. ;)

SMARTINSEN
05-17-2016, 07:04 PM
Who is more orange, Donald or Hilz? We should get Boehner to adjudicate.

Tom Montgomery
05-17-2016, 07:05 PM
Who is more orange, Donald or Hilz? We should get Boehner to adjudicate.
I say it amounts to a coin flip.

genglandoh
05-17-2016, 07:37 PM
This thread reminds me of this tee shirt

https://img1.etsystatic.com/022/0/6577742/il_fullxfull.518830379_dake.jpg

Tom Montgomery
05-17-2016, 07:42 PM
^
A bathroom-themed insult.



http://memecrunch.com/meme/2CF93/well-isn-t-that-special/image.jpg

L.W. Baxter
05-17-2016, 11:35 PM
Good work, Cantuckee.

bobbys
05-18-2016, 01:27 AM
I was tempted to enter the fray but then thought , it's going good without me, why interrupt a good thing.

John of Phoenix
05-18-2016, 12:21 PM
Bloomberg TV just said that the two front runners each have a 58% negative rating among likely voters. 58% negative!

The race between them favors Clinton slightly while Bernie defeats The Donald by double digits.

It just gets stranger and stranger.

Lew Barrett
05-19-2016, 02:10 PM
Worth a read.

Hilary Clinton (http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/hillary-clinton-was-liberal-hillary-clinton-is-liberal/)