It's politics. No different from Rubio or Cruz playing to their Cuban heritage. No different from Trump saying he's the 'Man' for the job.Quote:
Originally Posted by longway
Yep.Quote:
Originally Posted by longway
Printable View
It's politics. No different from Rubio or Cruz playing to their Cuban heritage. No different from Trump saying he's the 'Man' for the job.Quote:
Originally Posted by longway
Yep.Quote:
Originally Posted by longway
^ you are are utterly lost, i guess thats whats comes from trying to make sense of a bizarre and nonsensical campaign like hillaryous.
Her campaign is appealing to the sexism of her voter base, so she and they are the sexists.
:rofl:Quote:
Rubio or Cruz playing to their Cuban heritage. No different from Trump saying he's the 'Man' for the job.
i see the problem now, you are an idiot or an alien. i will try the less insulting option first, as you know... pc. Hello, we are on planet earth, what planet are you from?
and neither rubio or cruz playing to it, not that i have seen, but its certainly not a central plank of their campaign.
trump saying is the the 'man' for the job is sexist, omg so few words so much stupidity. does he do air quotes when he says 'man'. :)
The irony meter just exploded.Quote:
Originally Posted by longway
I never said that.Quote:
Originally Posted by longway
That's the point that you consistently miss: Hillary campaigning on being a woman is not sexist.
You're simply projecting your own sexism.
Hillary Clinton loves black people. And black people love Hillary—or so it seems. Black politicians have lined up in droves to endorse her, eager to prove their loyalty to the Clintons in the hopes that their faithfulness will be remembered and rewarded. Black pastors are opening their church doors, and the Clintons are making themselves comfortably at home once again, engaging effortlessly in all the usual rituals associated with “courting the black vote,” a pursuit that typically begins and ends with Democratic politicians making black people feel liked and taken seriously. Doing something concrete to improve the conditions under which most black people live is generally not required.
Hillary is looking to gain momentum on the campaign trail as the primaries move out of Iowa and New Hampshire and into states like South Carolina, where large pockets of black voters can be found. According to some polls, she leads Bernie Sanders by as much as 60 percent among African Americans. It seems that we—black people—are her winning card, one that Hillary is eager to play.
And it seems we’re eager to get played. Again.
The love affair between black folks and the Clintons has been going on for a long time. It began back in 1992, when Bill Clinton was running for president. He threw on some shades and played the saxophone on The Arsenio Hall Show. It seems silly in retrospect, but many of us fell for that. At a time when a popular slogan was “It’s a black thing, you wouldn’t understand,” Bill Clinton seemed to get us. When Toni Morrison dubbed him our first black president, we nodded our heads. We had our boy in the White House. Or at least we thought we did.
Black voters have been remarkably loyal to the Clintons for more than 25 years. It’s true that we eventually lined up behind Barack Obama in 2008, but it’s a measure of the Clinton allure that Hillary led Obama among black voters until he started winning caucuses and primaries. Now Hillary is running again. This time she’s facing a democratic socialist who promises a political revolution that will bring universal healthcare, a living wage, an end to rampant Wall Street greed, and the dismantling of the vast prison state—many of the same goals that Martin Luther King Jr. championed at the end of his life. Even so, black folks are sticking with the Clinton brand.
What have the Clintons done to earn such devotion? Did they take extreme political risks to defend the rights of African Americans? Did they courageously stand up to right-wing demagoguery about black communities? Did they help usher in a new era of hope and prosperity for neighborhoods devastated by deindustrialization, globalization, and the disappearance of work?
No. Quite the opposite.
More: Why Hillary Clinton Doesn?t Deserve the Black Vote | The Nation
Worth a read...
again?Quote:
Originally Posted by Troy
Quote:
Originally Posted by Black Heart
I put this article in the Dem candidate thread in SC a day or two ago.
The black vote will be important in South Carolina.
The article is worth a read or scan.
Yeah I would have thought that this article is worth a read too :)Blog: Hillary?s no-win situation at Goldman Sachs worsening as content of her paid speeches leaking outQuote:
Originally Posted by Black Heart
Oh What a tangled web we weave :) Ed Mezvinsky ? Father of the Groom : snopes.com
The denial and hypocrisy meter cranked up to infinity and beyond.Quote:
Originally Posted by AntRobertson
Trump is not campaigning on being a man, no-one else save Hypocritallary is using their sex or ethnicity in any campaign.
Cue some nitwit to tell me I am mansplaining. :dance:
Among many other things It takes balls and self respect to run a Country , however it proved beyond a shadow of a doubt with her hubby Billy blowjob that Hilarious Clinton has neither :)
The 'gender pay gap' is a non-issue | Institute of Economic AffairsQuote:
Originally Posted by AntRobertson
The truth about the bs 'gender' wage gap. The one that Liarlly pretends is due to discrimination, (as do many others) its just sexist demagoguery, lying to get votes. There is an income gap over a lifetime, but fcuk all to do with employer discrimination.Quote:
Regular readers of economics will know that despite common myths to the contrary, the reality is there isn't much of an unfair pay gap between genders. As the economy has become more service-based, coupled with increased technology that make domestic work less time-consuming, and ‘women's lib’, the wage gap that used to exist has narrowed so much that it has equalised. In fact, if you just look at males and females in their 20s and 30s, females earn slightly more. Obviously this tails off in the late 30s and 40s as motherhood becomes the primary driving force in the re-introduction of a wage gap - but it's not to do with discrimination, it is to do with biology and life choices.
interesting nugget, the reason for the difference is explained in the article.Quote:
There's an interesting paper from health economist Heather Brown who observes that single women with a higher BMI (body mass index) tend to earn higher wages than similar women with a lower BMI. Married men also have a wage rate that is positively related to their BMI - the more weight they carry the higher their wages tend to be. The opposite is true for single men and married women - there is a negative correlation between their age rate and BMI - the more weight they carry the lower their wages tend to be.
Interesting article :) Blog: Bernie Sanders?s first promise has already fallen on its face
I wouldn't call it 'mansplaining'. I think the term is lying.Quote:
Originally Posted by longway
Here is another way the DNC is enabling Hillary to steal the Nomination from Sanders.
(Using the term "steal" I mean she can win without the majority of non super-delegates or by fair fund raising.
DNC rolls back Obama ban on contributions from federal lobbyists
By Tom Hamburger and Paul Kane February 12
The Democratic National Committee has rolled back restrictions introduced by presidential candidate Barack Obama in 2008 that banned donations from federal lobbyists and political action committees.
The decision was viewed with disappointment Friday morning by good government activists who saw it as a step backward in the effort to limit special interest influence in Washington. Some suggested it could provide an advantage to Hillary Clinton’s fundraising efforts.
“It is a major step in the wrong direction,” said longtime reform advocate Fred Wertheimer. “And it is completely out of touch with the clear public rejection of the role of political money in Washington,” expressed during the 2016 campaign.
Entire: https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...9ad_story.html
^^Disgusting.
I reckon Bernie will use that in his stump speeches now and to flog Clinton with in the next debate.
^ Ladreth, I assume that graph is current or very recent.
The Black vote of 70 HRC 30 Sanders is a large gap but I wonder how relevant or non-relevant it may or may not be.
In the South Carolina primary I think it's relevant.
With the number of registered black voters that will vote, spread across fifty state, I wonder what the specific states are, that the black vote may, based on the black percentage of the population in the Dem primaries.
Looks like its getting a wee bit personal, the video on the TRHS is interesting :) although I have no horse in the race it seems as if Sanders says it right On stage and off, Hillary Clinton-Bernie Sanders contest turns testy - CNNPolitics.com
Not mansplaining near as I can tell. Just entirely incorrect, projecting your own sexism and apparently a little naive about what campaigning involves.Quote:
Originally Posted by longway
As far as i can tell, there hasn't been a poll in SC since Jan 28.
I can't see Bernie swinging a 64 / 27 gap all the way but it would be nice if it were to narrow dramatically.
Nevada Polls have gone from 50 / 27 to 45 / 45 ....
How will Hillary handle the pressure?
================================================== ==========
^ Apologies for the Alzheimer moment ... reposting articles
. . . which explains your even-handed position on the candidatesQuote:
Originally Posted by piwanoi
He's just shitting bricks because he knows she'd fuck up his Chump bet.Quote:
Originally Posted by AntRobertson
Chickens coming home to roost perhaps?Ex-Obama intel official: Hillary Clinton should drop out - CNNPolitics.com
^
No, chickens not coming home to roost. That is, if you bother to read the piece you see that the guy has no evidence, just opinion and baseless accusations. And at the end he seem to imply that even if messages weren't classified when they were received, Hillary is still guilty.
Desperate Rethugs, but with their record, what else is new?
Here is a portion.
Quote:
Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, the retired chief of the Defense Intelligence Agency, made the call in an interview with Jake Tapper on "The Lead."
"If it were me, I would have been out the door and probably in jail," said Flynn, who decried what he said was a "lack of accountability, frankly, in a person who should have been much more responsible in her actions as the secretary of state of the United States of America."
Clinton campaign spokesman Brian Fallon later told Tapper the general's suggestion was "just silly" and pointed to similar FBI probes of former Secretary of State Colin Powell and of aides to former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.
"In both of those two cases, you now have the same agency looking at their emails, personal emails, and saying that there is information that in retrospect they think should be treated as classified," Fallon said. "The exact same situation playing out in the two previous secretaries before Secretary Clinton. So I think that tells you everything about the relative seriousness of this."
When pressed by CNN, Flynn said, "I don't have any personal evidence" that Clinton or one of her staffers took material off a classified server and put it on an unclassified server.
Clinton emails: Did she do anything wrong or not?
Since leaving office, Flynn has been fiercely critical of the Obama administration's approach to the Middle East and has told Tapper that the President's advisors are more concerned with appearances than hard realities. Flynn said he has made himself available for advice to any presidential campaign that has asked, Democrat or Republican, and five campaigns have taken advantage of the offer, including Donald Trump's.
snip
The Democratic presidential candidate has repeatedly pointed to State Department findings that at the time the emails were sent, the information wasn't classified. The State Department has said that some emails were classified retroactively.
State Department will not release 22 'top secret' Clinton emails
The Clinton campaign has also pointed to a dispute between the State Department and the intelligence community over which kinds of documents should be classified. And it has charged that the investigation is politically motivated.
Fallon has said Clinton's campaign believes McCullough is working with Republican lawmakers to make sure the information becomes public to embarrass their candidate. Republicans asked the inspector general to investigate in March.
"This over-classification excuse is not an excuse," Flynn said Friday. "If it's classified, it's classified."
Quote:
Originally Posted by piwanoi
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrG
You'll find that piwanoi doesn't read his links . . . just posts one after the other, sometimes adding a question mark to feign affirmation while leaving it open-ended.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrG
If all these congressional hearings have found nothing to charge her with then a man like Flynn simply has an axe to grind
Thank you for precise reply ,but in your opinion do you think that the article and interview could well sow the seeds of doubt in many fickle voters minds ? and the way I see it the article and the interview will do her far more harm than good .Quote:
Originally Posted by MrG
That was the obvious intent. It certainly wasn't to spread information.Quote:
Originally Posted by piwanoi
He admitted as such when he said he had no solid proof , but was just giving his opinion on Clinton which in my opinion could well sway the floating voter away from her , which is all I am really saying .:)Quote:
Originally Posted by MrG
All though its very early days as yet , Articles like this certainly do not put lustre on Clintons ability to be POTUS State Department will not release 22 'top secret' Clinton emails - CNNPolitics.com
^
Just BS and inuendo. You may like to act coy, like you are just suggesting "possibilities" and opinions that could sway the vote. But the fact--as big as the nose on your face--is that when "opinions" are published they could have the added effect of becoming "fact" in the minds of some. Benghazi comes to mind. And that is what the liars on the right are counting on their minions to accomplish. Desperate. Desperate. Desperate.
Just stating my opinion pure and simple ,or is that Strictly Verboten if it differs from yours ?:smileylaughing:Quote:
Originally Posted by MrG
That's not what I said. I said your post is crap. It is designed to do nothing but keep a lie alive. You're still pretending.Quote:
Originally Posted by piwanoiJust stating my opinion pure and simple ,or is that Strictly Verboten if it differs from yours ?:smileylaughing:Quote:
Originally Posted by MrG
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrGThat's not what I said. I said your post is crap. It is designed to do nothing but keep a lie alive. You're still pretending.Quote:
Originally Posted by piwanoiJust stating my opinion pure and simple ,or is that Strictly Verboten if it differs from yours ?:smileylaughing:Quote:
Originally Posted by MrG
So you think Hillary using an unsecured non government server to transmit emails marked secure to be a non issue. Also it seems you are tying the email issue to the Bengahzi issue, am I interpreting this correctly?
That all depends on ones political affiliations , you are obviously a dyed in the wool Dem , whilst a Rep might find it OK , and I have made no claims either way, all I have said is this latest article and video may have some effect on Clintons popularity with the Dem voters , but of course if you have evidence that it will make no difference whatsoever please be my guest and produce it :).Quote:
Originally Posted by MrGThat's not what I said. I said your post is crap. It is designed to do nothing but keep a lie alive. You're still pretending.Quote:
Originally Posted by piwanoiJust stating my opinion pure and simple ,or is that Strictly Verboten if it differs from yours ?:smileylaughing:Quote:
Originally Posted by MrG
I see you mincing around the keyboard like a coy little girl. If only you were as clever as you think you are.Quote:
Originally Posted by piwanoiThat all depends on ones political affiliations , you are obviously a dyed in the wool Dem , whilst a Rep might find it OK , and I have made no claims either way, all I have said is this latest article and video may have some effect on Clintons popularity with the Dem voters , but of course if you have evidence that it will make no difference whatsoever please be my guest and produce it :).Quote:
Originally Posted by MrGThat's not what I said. I said your post is crap. It is designed to do nothing but keep a lie alive. You're still pretending.Quote:
Originally Posted by piwanoiJust stating my opinion pure and simple ,or is that Strictly Verboten if it differs from yours ?:smileylaughing:Quote:
Originally Posted by MrG
If something in them has now been re-classified as top secret then it would NOW be illegal for State to release them you dolt.Quote:
Originally Posted by piwanoi
So you have no evidence that the article and video will not cost Clinton Votes? ,all I am saying is that it could well do ,which is my opinion ,which you say is crap cos you do not agree with it . Maybe Sanders was right when he told Clinton in no uncertain terms when she attempted to pull him over the coals on his remarks about Obama , that in a democracy one should be allowed an opinion , here on TD that appears to be a pipe dream :smileylaughing:Quote:
Originally Posted by MrGI see you mincing around the keyboard like a coy little girl. If only you were as clever as you think you are.Quote:
Originally Posted by piwanoiThat all depends on ones political affiliations , you are obviously a dyed in the wool Dem , whilst a Rep might find it OK , and I have made no claims either way, all I have said is this latest article and video may have some effect on Clintons popularity with the Dem voters , but of course if you have evidence that it will make no difference whatsoever please be my guest and produce it :).Quote:
Originally Posted by MrGThat's not what I said. I said your post is crap. It is designed to do nothing but keep a lie alive. You're still pretending.Quote:
Originally Posted by piwanoiJust stating my opinion pure and simple ,or is that Strictly Verboten if it differs from yours ?:smileylaughing:Quote:
Originally Posted by MrG