Hillary Clinton

[Clocker]

Originally Posted by Saratoga_Mike

I checked with MediaMatters and Snopes, and they say all your info is wrong.

I have it on good authority that MediaMatters and Snopes also signed the double secret probation non-disclosure agreement.

[dartman51]

Originally Posted by Saratoga_Mike

I checked with MediaMatters and Snopes, and they say all your info is wrong.

What part of the 'info', is wrong?

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016...ail-probe.html

The FBI has confirmed to a senior Republican senator that agents were sworn to secrecy -- and subject to lie detector tests -- in the Hillary Clinton email probe, an extensive measure one former agent said could have a "chilling effect."

[Fager Fan]

Originally Posted by dartman51

Hillary has out spent Trump, 15 to 1, and is in a dead heat nationally. And, she is down 7 points in one poll. She will set a new high on campaign spending, all to attack Trump, and to convince people that she is not a liar. She can't run on her record, all she has, is attack, attack, attack. If Trump can take the high ground, not likely, and let others attack her, and he stay on policy, he will destroy her in November.

I love how people keep thinking Trump has to change his ways to win, when all he's done is win and win. Trump does well in his criticisms of her. One reason is that they're true. When Hillary goes after Trump, the criticisms are a stretch and sound lame. "That's the best you can come up with?"

[Tor Ekman]

From Scott Adams' Dilbert blog:

Trump's Glide Path

Is it my imagination, or has Trump been relatively non-controversial lately?Do you remember how Trump got lots of free publicity in the past year by saying approximately one outrageous and controversial thing each week, like clockwork? And do you remember how you thought his outrageous approach could never be a winning formula in the general election?

I’ve been saying since last year that Trump’s path to victory is simple. All he needs to do is STOP saying controversial things for the last several months before election day to prove he can control himself. Plus, voters have short memories. So whatever Trump does in the coming months will be more important than whatever happened last year. And lately he’s been more presidential, at least by Trump standards.

But here’s the fascinating part, at least to me. Trump’s consistency in being outrageous has created a situation in which we’re all expecting more of it. Now Trump is in a position to get man-bites-dog publicity (the best kind) simply by being non-controversial. And the longer he maintains this new approach, the more newsworthy it becomes. By late August you might be seeing headlines of this nature:

TRUMP PIVOTS TO SERIOUS

CAN TRUMP KEEP UP THE PRESIDENTIAL TONE?

HAS TRUMP CHANGED?

Now consider what Clinton and Trump each need to accomplish – and quickly – in order to win in November. Clinton needs to prove she is not crooked, which is now impossible because the head of the FBI has publicly certified her as crooked. At least that’s how it looks to the public. The public heard the FBI say Clinton broke the law, followed by a decision to not prosecute. That taint won’t wash off by November.

Trump, on the other hand, simply has to NOT do crazy-racist-sounding things for a few months. If he stays presidential (mostly) from here on out, people will believe he can moderate his scary persona at will. That’s all he needs to prove.

Clinton’s task of proving she is not crooked is literally impossible at this stage. But Trump’s task of NOT being outrageous for a few months is somewhat easy. He’s already doing it, and I don’t see him breaking a sweat.

You also have to factor in the Gingrich effect. No matter who gets tapped for Vice President, Gingrich has already created intellectual cover for Trump. Were you worried that Trump is dumb and under-informed? You don’t have that concern about Gingrich, even if you dislike him. Gingrich solves for Trump’s perceived intellect gap with Clinton. Expect Gingrich to have a key role in Trump’s government.

The new Quinnipiac poll shows Trump now leading in 4-out-of-5 battleground states. Most of the polling was done before the FBI announced its email server decision. Do you know what else was happening during that time to influence polls?

Answer: Nothing

In other words, Trump didn’t do anything outrageous for a few weeks. That’s all he needs to do from here on out – more nothing – to win in a landslide. The “Crooked Hillary” harpoon he landed a few months ago is bleeding her out. Trump’s glide path to victory involves picking his cabinet and acting serious for a few months. That’s all it will take. (Expect a few mini-outrages just for fun.)

[dartman51]

Originally Posted by Fager Fan

I love how people keep thinking Trump has to change his ways to win, when all he's done is win and win. Trump does well in his criticisms of her. One reason is that they're true. When Hillary goes after Trump, the criticisms are a stretch and sound lame. "That's the best you can come up with?"

Yeah, I understand, he won in the primaries. No problem. But the general, is a horse of a different color. I know, he got more votes, in the primary, then any other Repub candidate, EVER. But, even if those same people, ALL, come out to vote in the general, he will lose his ass. He needs more Repubs and Independents. His style turns a lot of people off. You can't afford to do that in the general. One thing about the Dems, they turn out to vote, no matter who their candidate is. The Repubs, not so much. If they did, Obama would not have been President.

[Saratoga_Mike]

Originally Posted by dartman51

What part of the 'info', is wrong?

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016...ail-probe.html

The FBI has confirmed to a senior Republican senator that agents were sworn to secrecy -- and subject to lie detector tests -- in the Hillary Clinton email probe, an extensive measure one former agent said could have a "chilling effect."

It was sarcasm.

[dartman51]

Originally Posted by Saratoga_Mike

It was sarcasm.

oops......sorry.

[Clocker]

Originally Posted by Saratoga_Mike

It was sarcasm.

Yeah, sure. You were getting into the Kool Aid and started channeling one of our local Obama fan boys. You have to wear your tin foil hat if you are going to drink that stuff.

[mostpost]

Originally Posted by Tor Ekman

Me thinks the ship be sinking . . . polling in true blue Iowa has the portly pantsuit up only 42-39, within the margin of error . . . LIAR, LIAR, PANTSUIT ON FIRE!!!

"True Blue" Iowa has two Republican Senators and three out of four Republican Congressmen. It has a Senate that is Democratic by three votes and a House of Representatives that is solidly Republican. How you could consider that "True Blue" is a mystery to me.

[Tor Ekman]

Iowa has been a blue state in every presidential election from 1988 to 2012, except for 2004 . . . it should be in the portly pantsuit's rather ample hip pocket, but it ain't

[davew]

Originally Posted by dartman51

Yeah, I understand, he won in the primaries. No problem. But the general, is a horse of a different color. I know, he got more votes, in the primary, then any other Repub candidate, EVER. But, even if those same people, ALL, come out to vote in the general, he will lose his ass. He needs more Repubs and Independents. His style turns a lot of people off. You can't afford to do that in the general. One thing about the Dems, they turn out to vote, no matter who their candidate is. The Repubs, not so much. If they did, Obama would not have been President.

The republicans do not have the 'get out the vote' procedure as well as the democrats. The dems bus people around for multiples and even get the dead to vote....

[Tom]

Remember LJB...used to hand out cigarettes to get votes?
Not sure who he is here today.....

[Saratoga_Mike]

Hillary called into Anderson Cooper's show last night to react to the Nice terrorism. I have no doubt she called Cooper after her staffers reported that Trump called into Fox. What did she say? First, she admitted we're at war with "terrorist jihadist." Good first step - recognize the problem. Her solution? Tighten NATO alliances. Huh? To be entirely fair, she kind of meant better intelligence sharing, but that really didn't seem to be her main point. Should we continue to accept Syrian refugees in the US? Yes, she asserted, but don't rush the process.

The most bizarre/Orwellian comment was (paraphrase) "what we don't need to do is rush into a ground war in Syria or make rash decisions." In the context of the discussion, which was a lightly veiled "how are you better than Trump on terrorism," she was suggesting Trump might start a ground war in Syria or God knows where else as a result of acts of terrorism. Does she listen to Trump? He's the anti-neo-con. She's the interventionist-loving neo-con with horrible, horrible foreign-policy judgment.

Trump 2.0? I haven't heard his comments today, but last night Trump was forceful, yet measured in his response to the Nice terrorism. Even though his response was visceral, it wasn't ego-centric (unlike his back-patting comments post-Orlando). General election pivot? Finally?

Yesterday afternoon Trump was 10/4 odds on PaddyPower. Today? 7/4.

[davew]

Hilary also called in to Bill O'Reilly

[Saratoga_Mike]

Originally Posted by davew

Hilary also called in to Bill O'Reilly

She was brave enough? That guy is such a joker.