When will Hillary Clinton give up her candidacy ? Part 2

@revelette2,

You're a joke, and so is Mitchell. Her name is at the top of the lists on off-the-record parties by Clinton for her "friends in the media."

She's in pocket. smh

1 Reply

@Lash,

Lash wrote:

Ok.

I think progressives should vote for Stein and conservatives should vote for that idiot, Gary Johnson --we should strengthen third parties and clean up the incumbent cesspool in DC.

Because the US mindset is so entrenched in our ignominious duopoly, it's hard for people to comprehend that heavy criticism of one party's candidate doesn't equate to support of the other major party.

I do cop to satisfaction of some anti-Clinton Trump supporters. I fear both equally. The primary difference between them: he may blunder into something horrible; she has carved out a mission toward it.

The president can't clean up DC. I am all for 3rd party candidates in state elections and even the House and Senate, but I could never throw my support behind that idiot Stein. She is so supremely unqualified for president that it's incomprehensible to me that anyone can support her.

If it's a strategic vote, like you suggest to 'strengthen third parties' that's one thing, but she's so bad in my opinion that I couldn't even get myself to do that.

2 Replies

@maporsche,

She could do so much less damage than the other three, is anti-war, anti-$$ in government, pro-environment and would have the help of the decent progressives.

Even a suspected loss, a showing in numbers, would catapult third parties to local and national prominence, and break up this horror show that has Clinton and Trump vying for the Oval.

My thinking, anyway.

0 Replies

@maporsche,

Yes. Voters would clean up the cesspool. We'd have greens and libertarians entering politics after a show of strength.

We could finally break the stranglehold incumbents have on the system.

1 Reply

@Lash,

Lash wrote:

Yes. Voters would clean up the cesspool. We'd have greens and libertarians entering politics after a show of strength.

We could finally break the stranglehold incumbents have on the system.

Who are the greens and libertarians in your district or state elections Lash? Who are you volunteering for? Why don't you run for office?

1 Reply

@maporsche,

I've supported three candidates financially. Not local.

I hope someone will emerge locally who I could support. A strong showing for Jill might give like-minded citizens hope, another good reason to vote Stein.

1 Reply

@Lash,

Lash wrote:

I've supported three candidates financially. Not local.

I hope someone will emerge locally who I could support. A strong showing for Jill might give like-minded citizens hope, another good reason to vote Stein.

I'm not ever going to give support to Stein for president; never. If she wants to be a Representative or some other government position, then maybe (although she's said a lot of things that worry me).

I'm not trying to badger you, but what three candidates? Who else is out there?

0 Replies

I know I'm a bit fixated on Texas. I do read about other states, but Texas absolutely fascinates me. Maybe it's from my love of James Dean in Giant? Dunno.

http://www.npr.org/2016/10/18/498376750/is-hillary-clinton-really-trying-to-win-texas

and Arizona

I'd almost pay to be in Arizona right now

Quote:

Arizona has voted Democratic only once in a presidential race since 1952. Recent polls show a dead heat in that state, and the Clinton campaign believes Donald Trump's rhetoric about Mexicans will motivate Latinos in the state to turn out for the Democrats.

Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook described the race there as an "uphill climb" in a call with reporters on Monday. But high profile surrogates — Michelle Obama, Chelsea Clinton and Bernie Sanders — are all campaigning there this week. The campaign is investing $2 million there in TV ads and other voter outreach.

not the birthday present Tico was hoping for is my guess Smile

Quote:

So if Clinton is confident in her position in enough battleground states to clear 270 electoral votes, and has some money to spend in the last three weeks of the campaign, putting some funds into states that could help secure a Democratic majority in the Senate next year makes sense. "It's always been important to Secretary Clinton that we partner together with all candidates," Mook said.

This spending also puts Republicans on defense in a way they wouldn't be if Trump was more competitive in states like Virginia, Colorado and Michigan. That would have caused the Clinton campaign to pour everything into defending those electoral votes, instead of being able to expand its map.

1 Reply

@Lash,

You have stated here my essential position on the election.

0 Replies

@ehBeth,

Unfortunately, neither of Texas' senate seats is up for election this year.

1 Reply

@DrewDad,

The section about the Senate was from a different piece of the article than the bit about Texas.

1 Reply

@Lash,

As usual you nothing of substance to add other than conspiracy theories. Those Clintons must have very big pockets to have so many people in them; not to mention never ending luck to keep evading the smear tactics which have thrown at them for thirty years. Powerful people.

0 Replies

@Lash,

Quote:

Because the US mindset is so entrenched in our ignominious duopoly, it's hard for people to comprehend that heavy criticism of one party's candidate doesn't equate to support of the other major party.

Precisely. And when people say that Stein is a raving lunatic, I point out that Sanders' policies were largely aligned with Stein's.

The regulars on this forum can't seem to think outside the box at all. Too convinced by corporate press that there is no democracy; just a duopoly.

Our recent federal elections in OZ saw a rank outsider now entrenched in the Senate, along with several other independents, who now hold the balance of power when it comes to legislation being implemented by the duopoly.

Things can, and do, change. It's time American voters realised this.

0 Replies

I found something that I agree with Hillary in the dumped emails, It is she would like to see no boarders. How do you fell about that?

2 Replies

@reasoning logic,

reasoning logic wrote:

I found something that I agree with Hillary in the dumped emails, It is she would like to see no boarders. How do you fell about that?

She was just responding to her web developer on the layout appearance of her site. She didnt want any borders.

There is a "price" to be paid for any policy. If she thinks its free of any negative fault shes delusional. But that wouldn't be the first time.

0 Replies

@reasoning logic,

I dont own a boarding house so I dont care one way or another.

2 Replies

@RABEL222,

Quote:

I dont own a boarding house so I dont care one way or another.

Do you like John Lennon's view of borders and countries?

0 Replies

@RABEL222,

0 Replies

Of course, since the Emails passed through the hands of the Russians, we have no idea if Hillary talked about "open borders" or not. All these people who take the word of these "revelations" after they have passed through Russian hands before ever getting to Wikileaks are being extremely gullible.

1 Reply

@Blickers,

Assuming they ever went through "Russian hands" before getting to wikileaks is "extremely gullible".

2 Replies

When will Hillary Clinton give up her candidacy ? Part 2

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know