WAPO:
Clinton says she regrets labeling `half’ of Trump supporters `deplorable’
So what do voters hear/see now?
That HRC is not only politically tone deaf but weak.A dilly-dallier. An appeaser.
Tone deaf squared!!!
Unbelievable.
Trump is going to trounce her at the first debate.
Watch.
Not only “Crooked Hillary.”
“Elitist Hillary”
“Weak Hillary”
“Sick Hillary”
“Over-coached Hillary”
“Bill-enabler Hillary”
“Tool-of-Wall Street Hillary”
“Entitlement Hillary”
“Email Hillary”
“Benghazi Hillary”
And on and on and on and on and on and…
He’s actually going have to be careful not to be seen as someone bullying a weakling.
Un-fucking-believable!!!
Remember all of those leftiness lines about how Trump was trying to throw the election?
Long ago?
Like…last week?
Ditto here.
BINGO!!!
I knew she was not particularly gifted politically, but really!!!
Not like this!!!
AG
If she loses, this date…9/10/16…will be sen at the turning point.
Watch.
AG
“…will be seen…”
Duh.
AG
“…will be seen as…”
Duh twice!!!
Long, hard, hot day.
Sorry.
“Say goodnight, Gracie.”
“Goodnight, Gracie.”
AG
You are now falling into the same trap as the Hillary supporters. They underestimate Trump and overestimate HRC. You underestimate HRC’s campaign team (even if your estimate of HRC is accurate enough) and overestimate Trump. Need I remind you of how wildly wrong you were about Rand Paul while many here kept pointing out valid reasons and criteria as to why your opinion of Paul a flight of fancy?
I said many times that I believed Rand Paul lacked the “it” factor that is necessary to win what has become a popularity contest disguised as a presidential election here over the last few decades. I also said that I agreed with both him and his father about both downsizing government and stepping away from the World Cop thing. I stand by both positions.
As far as underestimating HRC’s campaign team…I got your HRC team right here. In a nutshell.
Please!!!
It is almost impossible to “underestimate” the mainstream DemRat culture today.
As mino said elsewhere today…”smug” kinda sums it up.
The U.S, electorate is in no mood for “smug.” They’re gonna take “outrageous” first.
Watch.
AG
Your praise for Rand Paul may have been measured and balanced in your mind, but that’s not how your comments and diaries on him read. Your style doesn’t allow for much in the way of nuance. So, all your Rand Paul is gonna be a real contender (“bet on it”) diaries and comments could hardly have been read as narrowly supporting their positions to downsize government and stop playing world-cop. As neither Paul was ever going to be a contender, why even waste time on them? It’s not as if they are the only politicians advocating for either of those positions. Hell, name the Republican politicians that don’t support downsizing government? A position that I personally oppose. There are too few government employees — worker bees doing necessary and needed work–, too many outside contractors, and too many suits creating paper that isn’t needed and will never be read.
DWS was effective in her role at the DNC to get HRC nominated. That’s a fact and the disgust that you and many feel towards her doesn’t alter that fact regardless of how many times you post her picture as if its evidence of her failure.
You, and nobody really, don’t know the names and faces of all those now working on her behalf. Some that are known, like Brock and Blumenthal, are ruthless and effective. Not ruthless and effective enough to get such a deeply flawed candidate like HRC over the finish line if her opponent were a decent candidate with a first rate campaign team. But at this time, no such potential GOP candidate existed for the 2016 race. Their best shot, IMO, this time around was Kasich. Dull and boring but able to hide his extremism and with far more experience in office than HRC. They decided to go another way with a novice showman. At the end of the day, the default position for that slim two to three percent that aren’t strictly GOP partisans is to go with experience. A strong third party candidate can upset the apple cart but that condition doesn’t exist this time around. The Johnson/Weld libertarianism has limited appeal. Keeping them off the debate stages benefits HRC because they hurt Trump more than her and Trump isn’t smart enough to recognize that insisting upon Johnson and Stein be included in the debates could potentially benefit him.
DWS is a symbol…a very useful symbol in my opinion, almost to the point of being a pictograph…of the whole DemRat party structure. I think that it…just like the whole RatPub structure…is now rotten to its very core. Extend that, please. If just about the only national pols who can get elected are either RatPubs or DemRats, what does that say about the federal government?
It says that it is also rotted out.
On one side we have Bernie Sanders …disregarding his supposed “betrayal of leftiness standards” (both because there really are no “leftiness standards” other than the standard whingeing and whining that the centrists put up on dKos, and also because he has managed to survive as an independent with some honor left to him in said rotted-out corpse of a federal government)…as I was saying, we have Bernie Sanders as an example of how the attempt to remain an honest ideologue in a dishonest system gets you sidelined.
On the other hand we have the Pauls…the only other national-level pols who have had anything whatsoever real to say about the condition into which this nation has fallen over the past 50+ years.
“Waste time on them?” What is the alternative, Marie? Just say “fuck it” and walk away?
Not my nature.
I do keep trying.
Deal wid it.
ASG
P.S. NBC News
I am no fan of the whole poll thing, but jiggered or not, this is shocking.
If it’s not jiggered, HRC has essentially lost her “sure thing” lead.
If is jiggered, the controllers have either given up on the fix or come to some sort of understanding with Trump.
Scary, either way.
Bet on it.
AG
You’re like many that pooh-pooh polls except when the polls support their claims.
I find national polls useful for taking the temperature of the electorate. The consistent finding on that is low enthusiasm for all the candidates. A “pick-your-poison” narrative, and HRC has had the edge on that for months. Slight because she’s awful, but unlike many nominees at this stage of an election cycle, Trump isn’t unknown by a portion of the reliable voter base. Political junkies often overlook that fact and then misread polls in the period after Labor Day and until mid-October. Check out the 2012 polls from October 1 – 23. Obama supporters were sweating it and Mitt supporters were gleeful, and I thought both were nuts because the outcome was really never in doubt.
It’s probably not too early to call this one either. The EV in the worst case scenario for HRC still results in Trump falling short. However, desperation is higher than usual this year and desperate people often do desperate things. I expect that the debates will factor into the undecided/squishy electorate. All HRC has to do is not fold like that GOP cheap suits did when attacked by Trump. No prior candidate has ever had as much debate training and prep as HRC and her trainers are very good. She only wobbles when debating someone that knows his stuff and is polished. She has two well developed tactics she uses against an opponent that is belligerent and both are effective.
What are the two tactics she uses against a belligerent opponent?
I repeat:
Was I not clear enough?
OK, I’ll try again:
Occasionally a so-called “honest poll” (Not as rare as an honest pol, but close.) illustrates something real.
This is one of those polls.
Honest or jiggered, it portends bad things.
AS