DNC vs Sanders. Is the DNC right to block Sander's access to DNC voter data?

@Lash,

Quote:

Obama has the greatest name recognition in America

I like your reasoning. The difference between the number of Americans who recognize the name Obama and who haven't ever bumped into the name George W Bush is, like, huge.

1 Reply

@Lash,

Quote:

How can she be most admired AND 60% of Americans deem her most untrustworthy of politicians?

Yea it can be both, in fact I remember during the whole dust up with Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinski, Bill Clinton's likable ratings went through the roof while people didn't exactly trust him.

Quote:

Former U.S. President Bill Clinton's public image is most notably characterized by high public approval ratings, aided by his youthful appearance, as well as his charismatic, and soundbite-ready style of speech. His personal background and lifestyle led to Nobel Prize-winning novelist Toni Morrison to call him the first "black president". Clinton was also dogged by investigations throughout his presidency, particularly of sexual misconduct, damaging the public's beliefs of his trustworthiness, though his approval ratings remained high, even as his impeachment trial continued.

Clinton's job approval rating ranged from 36% in mid-1993 to 64% in late 1993 and early 1994.[1] In his second term, his rating consistently ranged from the high-50s to the high-60s.[1][2] After his impeachment proceedings in 1998 and 1999, Clinton's rating reached its highest point at 73% approval.[3] He finished with a Gallup poll approval rating of 65%,[4] higher than that of every other departing president measured since Harry Truman.[5]

source

I am not sure Hillary can carry it off as well as Bill did, but she seems to be holding up.

0 Replies

@blatham,

0 Replies

@blatham,

Quote:

I like your reasoning. The difference between the number of Americans who recognize the name Obama and who haven't ever bumped into the name George W Bush is, like, huge.

I'm not sure she is getting your humor. Could be ignoring it.

2 Replies

@blatham,

blatham wrote:

Because it can't be true. It's unpossible that so many people could like her. She's not likeable. Any suggestion or evidence saying anything else is axiomatically unworthy of attention. Or acknowledgement.

Don't be silly. First of all, I wrote she wasn't likable and you responded she was admired. I in turn, pointed out, accurately, that liking and admiring are not the same. I can admire someone for having extensive knowledge and still find them unlikable. Of course there are people who like her and there are people who admire her, but what does that ultimately mean?

There are people who like and admire Trump and Cruz.

Trump has high unfavorables and they will work against his chances. So does Clinton.

It's no secret that I'm not a huge fan of Bill Clinton. He's more of a sociopath than his wife, but he's a likable rogue. I can help but like him, and while I admire some of his talents, he the sort of slimy sexual predator that liberals would endlessly demonize if he were Republican.

2 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

I'm going to go out on a limb and say why I never bought that stuff about Bill Clinton being a sexual predator. It is because I can't picture him having had to. If you have read Monica Lewinski's book, she really did go out of her way to get Bill's attention that first time. I admit it wasn't hard to do, and I always thought Bill Clinton to have no discrimination or sense at all when it came to his sex life (from the books I have read, I had all three of them at one time, Bill's, Monica's and Hillary's) but I just never once saw him as a predator, to him it was probably just fun and games on both sides. Perhaps he flirted with Paula Jones and she didn't appreciate it, but I don't see it going any further. If I saw him as you guys do, I couldn't have ever liked him at all. Much less admired him for Presidential abilities.

1 Reply

@revelette2,

Quote:

I'm not sure she is getting your humor.

Lash looks to be on a serious quest to maintain a notion and, perhaps, to convince others the notion is a good one.

But quite aside from Lash and this particular discussion, there's a wonderful and very interesting phenomenon worthy of attention - why is it that so few humorists in American culture, presently and historically, are political conservatives. If one draws up two columns - humorists of a liberal persuasion and humorists of a conservative persuasion - one column is really, really short.

And that's damned interesting.

0 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

Quote:

Don't be silly. First of all, I wrote she wasn't likable and you responded she was admired. I in turn, pointed out, accurately, that liking and admiring are not the same.

Of course they are not the same. But you argue as if they are unrelated and bear no or little connection to each other. What are the chances that any individual could poll, seven years straight, as the most admirable female or male in the world and yet, at the same time, be seen by majorities as unlikable? It is a preposterous position to hold.

If you were to say that you don't like her and many others, mainly conservatives, don't like her (though some small portion of that group admire her - probably not you though) then I'd say, "fine". But you are claiming far more than that.

And that's as far as I'm going to take this discussion with you and Lash. Even if she is the nominee and wins the election, I have zero confidence you or Lash will rethink your notion.

0 Replies

@revelette2,

Or, her threshold for humor isn't quite as low as yours...

1 Reply

On another thread here, I linked to a piece by Steve Benen (one of my favorite political writers/pundits) listing all the things he got wrong last year http://on.msnbc.com/1YTkWK0

By way of contrast, does anyone recall acknowledgement from these folks of getting things really very wrong?

Quote:

4 Things That Were Supposed To Happen By 2016 Because Obama Was Reelected
-In March 2012, on the floor of the United States Senate, Mike Lee (R-UT) predicted that if Obama was reelected gas would cost $6.05 per gallon by the start 2015. Lee said that gas prices would rise 5 cents for every month Obama was in office, ultimately reaching $6.60 per gallon.
- Newt Gingrich, running for the GOP nomination, predicted that if Obama was reelected he would push gas to “$10 a gallon.” Gingrich said he would reduce gas prices dramatically by reversing Obama’s energy policies. Gingrich flanked himself with campaign signs promising $2.50 gas if he was elected.
*** Today, the nationwide average for a gallon of gas is $2.00.

-In September 2012, Mitt Romney predicted that if Obama is reelected “you’re going to see chronic high unemployment continue four years or longer.” At the time, the unemployment rate was 8.1% and had been between 8.1% and 8.3% for the entire year.
***The unemployment rate currently stands at 5.0% and has been under 6% since September 2014.

-Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump
The stock market and US dollar are both plunging today. Welcome to @BarackObama’s second term.
***The Dow Jones Industrial Average currently stands at 17,425.03 and, despite a downturn in 2015, is up over 27% since Obama was reelected.

-Rush Limbaugh predicted that “the country’s economy is going to collapse if Obama is re-elected.” Limbaugh was confident in his prediction: “There’s no if about this. And it’s gonna be ugly. It’s gonna be gut wrenching, but it will happen.”

http://bit.ly/1kxQIJD

0 Replies

@Lash,

Quote:

Or, her threshold for humor isn't quite as low as yours...

What in the world could be low about Bush or other well known names being just as well known as Hillary's which was Blatham's subtle point he made which struck me as humorous in the way he put it.

1 Reply

Aside from all else...

Hope you guys each have a great year.

0 Replies

@revelette2,

Wasn't funny.

0 Replies

@revelette2,

revelette2 wrote:

I'm going to go out on a limb and say why I never bought that stuff about Bill Clinton being a sexual predator. It is because I can't picture him having had to. If you have read Monica Lewinski's book, she really did go out of her way to get Bill's attention that first time. I admit it wasn't hard to do, and I always thought Bill Clinton to have no discrimination or sense at all when it came to his sex life (from the books I have read, I had all three of them at one time, Bill's, Monica's and Hillary's) but I just never once saw him as a predator, to him it was probably just fun and games on both sides. Perhaps he flirted with Paula Jones and she didn't appreciate it, but I don't see it going any further. If I saw him as you guys do, I couldn't have ever liked him at all. Much less admired him for Presidential abilities.

I suspect that many of the people who don't see him for what he is share your view. I don't imagine that you would ever ignore, let alone condone, what you believed to be sexual predation, but I think you have chosen to convince yourself that he is not what he is. Towards this end you have been assisted by Clintonistas (including his wife) who made it their job to attack and demean any woman who had the temerity to object to or identify his predation.

I had and have no intention of re-arguing Clinton's sexual misadventures. It's, apparently, impossible to persuade otherwise those who are convinced he was merely a flirt who just had the bad luck of flirting with scheming sluts. My point was that I believe him to be a sexual predator, but still find him "likable."

I would hope that it goes without saying that I don't find his sexual harassing a "likable" aspect, and that I believe it to be a significant character flaw that seriously diminishes his legacy as president. There are, though, people with very serious character flaws who can be charismatic, personable, and amusing...in short, "likable." They are often known as sociopaths. It may not be as clear, but I feel I can admire certain talents of an overall deplorable character without admiring the character as a man or woman. In any case I think those who defend and excuse Clinton and his sexual predation have a lot more 'splaining to do than someone who acknowledges it and still finds him "likable."

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

For someone is not going to argue something, you had a lot to say about his sexual activities. I think he was more than a flirt, he had known affairs, consensual affairs, some long term. What I don't believe is that he forced in any way someone to have any kind of sexual acts and I don't think it has been proven. Affairs, sexual acts, yes, force or harassment, no. It wasn't even proven in court despite their best efforts. I think his affairs was personal, Paula Jones was pure politics, as well as that other rape charge. It was just not credible or believable by anyone. I also think for a smart guy, Bill Clinton behaved unbelievably stupid. I mean he had to know the Star report conspiracy ring was just waiting to trip him up and I guess he felt like he could get away with having a consensual relations with Monica Lewinski if he was smart enough to get around them. It was a dumb thing to do, but not criminal. I could see Hillary have a holly fit over it and throwing things. Despite the mocking Hillary got, she was in my honest opinion right about the vast right wing conspiracy. One of the players so to speak even wrote a book talking about the whole thing. I forget his name right now.

This line of attack is so obvious, I am just afraid it will work. Words like sexual predator and harassment puts a different aspect than just consensual affairs even if was a 21 year old intern.

2 Replies

@revelette2,

Monica Lewinski is a red herring in Bill Predator charges.

1 Reply

@Lash,

There's a book called THE HUNTING OF THE PRESIDENT about Bill Clinton. Many more are about the right wing conspiracy against the Clintons.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

CI, even if he's being hunted, that has no bearing on guilt or innocence. His behavior just made his enemies gleeful.

The fact that Clinton has enemies doesn't absolve his alleged crimes.

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

Of coarse anyone can nitpick, but I'm pretty sure most understand what I meant.
Only a devout republican like you would attack it.

Universal health care is good for all the people. That's a simple fact that goes over the head of republicans.

Interesting. You make broad sweeping and unsupported assertions about various policies of large countries and categorize any contrary facts as either "throw aaway claims" or "nitpicking".

Frankly I'm not sure you understood what you meant.

I'm not a devout Republican, and I didn't attack you. This is a conversation, not your pulpit.

2 Replies

@georgeob1,

That universal health care is good for all people is a simple fact. The CDC protects everybody. Good health care means healthier children that results in better results in every aspect of life.
Why are you against it?

1 Reply

DNC vs Sanders. Is the DNC right to block Sander's access to DNC voter data?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know