PDA

View Full Version : Was Hillary's announcement that Bill will manage the economy a campaign stunt?



genglandoh
05-31-2016, 12:07 PM
I started a thread asking Should Hillary release her list of potential Supreme court picks? (http://forum.woodenboat.com/showthread.php?207498-Should-Hillary-release-her-list-of-potential-Supreme-court-picks)

Some had said that they viewed Trump releasing his supreme count picks was just a campaign stunt.
So I would guess the same people would consider Hillary's announcement that Bill will manager the economy is also a campaign stunt.

For the record I do not think either of these announcements were campaign stunts.
1. Trump releasing his supreme count picks was to help unite the Rep party around him.
2. Hillary announcing that Bill will manager the economy is also just a way to help unite the Dem party around her.

delecta
05-31-2016, 12:28 PM
Clinton road the internet wave and what Volckers did, anyone that thinks Bill had anything to do with what happened needs to remove their rose colored glasses. To answer your question, of course it was a political stunt.

Norm will be here shortly to agree with me....or produce twenty left wing bs sites to prove that Volckers was an idiot appointed by Carter, the Regan tax reform had no bearing on the Clinton years and you're damn right Bill should be in charge.

Waiting I remain.

Norman Bernstein
05-31-2016, 12:30 PM
Hillary's statement was foolish.

However, the whole statement must be read in context. No, she said, he would NOT have any official role, and NOT be part of the cabinet.

She COULD have said that she'd tap Bill for his ideas about the economy, since Bill Clinton was a pretty successful President, in terms of how the economy was managed during his administration... and there would be nothing wrong with saying something like that. I'd expect any President to look for the closest source of expertise, experience, and judgment... without making any of it 'official'.

So, her wording was poor... her idea was good.

slug
05-31-2016, 12:52 PM
Hillary is just informing voters that every thing is under control.

While Hllary is behind bars, Bubba will take over .

kinda like a wrestling tag team
The C team

http://s33.postimg.org/qqqvwvibj/image.jpg (http://postimage.org/)
picture host (http://postimage.org/)

ljb5
05-31-2016, 02:28 PM
Some had said that they viewed Trump releasing his supreme count picks was just a campaign stunt.
So I would guess the same people would consider Hillary's announcement that Bill will manager the economy is also a campaign stunt.


It seems like you have a real need to apply simple, rigid definitions to complex situations, or demand juvenile yes/no answers to nuanced questions.

And then, when you find that not everyone is willing to go along with that, you get frustrated and act like the world is being unfair to you.

I suspect I'm not the first person who has noticed this about you.

jack grebe
05-31-2016, 03:31 PM
I started a thread asking [B][URL="http://forum.woodenboat.com/showthread.php?207498-Should-Hillary-release-her-list-of-potential-Supreme-court-picks"]Hillary's announcement that Bill will manager the Hillary announcing that Bill will manager the economy is also just a way to help unite the Dem party around her.
I would be happy if Bill would just manage to leave the interns alone.

genglandoh
05-31-2016, 07:13 PM
Hillary's statement was foolish.

However, the whole statement must be read in context. No, she said, he would NOT have any official role, and NOT be part of the cabinet.

She COULD have said that she'd tap Bill for his ideas about the economy, since Bill Clinton was a pretty successful President, in terms of how the economy was managed during his administration... and there would be nothing wrong with saying something like that. I'd expect any President to look for the closest source of expertise, experience, and judgment... without making any of it 'official'.

So, her wording was poor... her idea was good.

Norm you seen to be talking out of both sides of your mouth.
You claim in another thread that just because Trump released a list of potential supreme court picks it is a campaign stunt.
But when Hillary announces her pick to run the economy you are only think her wording was foolish.


For reference


Unlike Trump, she doesn't need to pander.


If/when she's elected, there's no doubt she'll make a selection. She wont 'publish a list'. The only reason Donald Trump published a 'list' (something which isn't normally done, and is in especially bad taste, since it's not a competition), was to try to demonstrate his conservative bona-fides. In other words, it was a campaign stunt.

And you obviously fell for it.

http://forum.woodenboat.com/showthread.php?207498-Should-Hillary-release-her-list-of-potential-Supreme-court-picks

ljb5
05-31-2016, 08:30 PM
Again: you are applying a rigid definition to a nuanced situation.

Superficially, one might conclude that Trump releasing a list of SCOTUS candidates is identical to Hillary answering a question about the role her husband. But other people, less superficial people, less.... rigidly limited people perceive a significant difference.

You seem really committed to applying very rigid litmus tests to complex situations. I sometimes wonder how you can function as an employed engineer, but other times it occurs to that you're suited to nothing else.

oznabrag
06-01-2016, 12:26 AM
I would be happy if Bill would just manage to leave the interns alone.

I would have been happier if Bill had managed to score the A girls, but he seemed content with the Bs.

oznabrag
06-01-2016, 12:30 AM
Norm you seen to be talking out of both sides of your mouth.
You claim in another thread that just because Trump released a list of potential supreme court picks it is a campaign stunt.
But when Hillary announces her pick to run the economy you are only think her wording was foolish.

http://forum.woodenboat.com/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by Norman Bernstein http://forum.woodenboat.com/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://forum.woodenboat.com/showthread.php?p=4904781#post4904781)

Hillary's statement was foolish.

However, the whole statement must be read in context. No, she said, he would NOT have any official role, and NOT be part of the cabinet.

She COULD have said that she'd tap Bill for his ideas about the economy, since Bill Clinton was a pretty successful President, in terms of how the economy was managed during his administration... and there would be nothing wrong with saying something like that. I'd expect any President to look for the closest source of expertise, experience, and judgment... without making any of it 'official'.

So, her wording was poor... her idea was good.




Ya know, if what Norm says is true, that
she said, he would NOT have any official role, and NOT be part of the cabinet. , then it seems like you are just making it up as you go along, complaining about something that never happened.