More information is good.

Post #439,492 by Another Scott 7/16/21 8:20:50 AM 7/16/21 8:20:50 AM Reply	More information is good. I suspect the Guardian letter is disinformation like W's TANG letter (parts/most of the information is true; the document itself is fake). It's an attempt to discredit the information when it comes out that the document is fake. Hillary lost because of Comey. Cheers, Scott.
Post #439,493 by drook 7/16/21 10:08:50 AM 7/16/21 10:08:50 AM Reply	And because of the NYT "It must be important. The Times keeps covering it." The difference between journalism and stenography ... Stenography: Senator Jones said that ... Journalism: Senator Jones said that ... This is in fact standard practice and not at all unusual. -- Drew
Post #439,665 by mmoffitt 8/18/21 8:34:28 AM 8/18/21 8:34:28 AM Reply	"Hillary lost because of Comey." So, no new material yet. Come on, Scott. You're better than that. Hillary lost because she was a crappy candidate. Surely there's no harm in admitting that now. bcnu, Mikem It's mourning in America again.
Post #439,668 by drook 8/18/21 11:20:13 AM 8/18/21 11:20:13 AM Reply	Disagree If we say it was because she was a bad candidate, then it lets the media off the hook for the things they did to make the problems worse. When there are many problems, we have to address all of them. -- Drew
Post #439,669 by Another Scott 8/18/21 2:04:26 PM 8/18/21 2:04:26 PM Reply	Drum has the receipts. https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2017/06/lets-cut-crap-about-why-hillary-clinton-lost/ But look: no candidate is perfect and every campaign has stuff like that. It comes with the territory. And despite all that, Clinton had a comfortable 7-point lead by the end of September. Those things couldn’t have been the reason for her loss since they were all well known by then. After that, she crushed Trump in all three debates and was all set to win. So why didn’t she? The answer is pretty simple: despite running a pretty good campaign, she got walloped by things that decidedly don’t come with the territory: Russian interference via the WikiLeaks drip; an indefensible letter released by the FBI director; and a press corps that treated the Comey letter like the OJ trial. She got slammed late in the game, and had no time to recover. That’s just what happened. Denying that reality because we like losers to wear hair shirts is dumb. HTH. Cheers, Scott.
Post #439,675 by malraux 8/19/21 2:59:28 PM 8/19/21 2:59:28 PM Reply	Based on how well the polling went, it probably wasn't a 7 point lead. Regards, -scott Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson.
Post #439,677 by boxley 8/19/21 5:00:17 PM 8/19/21 5:00:17 PM Reply	:-) "Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts" – Richard Feynman
Post #439,696 by mmoffitt 8/23/21 7:56:22 AM 8/23/21 7:56:22 AM Reply	Heh. That's some list of three things she did wrong. Here's a little better one https://www.politifact.com/article/2015/sep/02/11-examples-hillary-clinton-and-bernie-sanders-hol/ And that doesn't even count not going to Wisconsin. bcnu, Mikem It's mourning in America again.
Post #439,700 by CRConrad 8/23/21 9:47:14 AM 8/23/21 9:47:14 AM Reply	Dunno what universe you live in, but in the one the rest of us inhabit... ...the 2016 presidential election wasn't between Clinton and Sanders. She won the primary, so in comparison to Sanders, she did obviously get shit more right than wrong. It was the one against Trump she lost. The discussion is "Was she screwed by the Russians / media / twenty-year Republican hate campaign, or did she lose* through her own fault?".* Neither is applicable to her primary campaign against Sanders, because she didn't lose that one. Do try not to let your irrational hatred of her cloud your mind to the extent that it obviously did here. -- Christian R. Conrad The Man Who Apparently Still Knows Fucking Everything Mail: Same username as at the top left of this post, at iki.fi
Post #439,735 by mmoffitt 8/30/21 1:23:43 PM 8/30/21 1:23:43 PM Reply	I used that list because it pointed out to most sentient beings that listing only three things was a half-assed attempt to describe her "weaknesses". Anything on the "differences with Sanders" was a reason not to vote for her. I thought that was obvious. HTH. bcnu, Mikem It's mourning in America again.
Post #439,740 by CRConrad 8/31/21 3:56:59 AM 8/31/21 3:57:19 AM Reply	You thought (as usual) wrong. Better leave the thinking to people who don't fuck it up all the time. Edited by CRConrad Aug. 31, 2021, 03:57:19 AM EDT Expand All History
Post #439,742 by mmoffitt 8/31/21 10:28:09 AM 8/31/21 10:28:09 AM Reply	Sorry. I overestimated you again. bcnu, Mikem It's mourning in America again.
Post #439,747 by CRConrad 9/1/21 2:32:00 AM 9/1/21 2:32:00 AM Reply	Almost correct. Only, as so often before, it was yourself you overestimated.
Post #439,749 by mmoffitt 9/1/21 9:22:22 AM 9/1/21 9:22:22 AM Reply	To be clear, GroupThink != Think. HTH. bcnu, Mikem It's mourning in America again.
Post #439,751 by CRConrad 9/2/21 5:23:19 AM 9/2/21 5:23:19 AM Reply	Yes, exactly. So you should really try to wean yourself off the Clinton-hater right-wing groupthink. -- Christian R. Conrad The Man Who Apparently Still Knows Fucking Everything Mail: Same username as at the top left of this post, at iki.fi
Post #439,808 by mmoffitt 9/8/21 4:09:58 PM 9/8/21 4:09:58 PM Reply	Eh, not exactly. The Right attacks her for being too Left (and for being a woman who knows she's above a life of barefoot pregnancy in the kitchen). I attack her for things like helping the garment industry in Haiti block the establishment of trade unions, her support for just about any old war, her (and her husband's) all too cozy relationship with Wall Street, her remarkable belief that repealing Glass-Steagall was a good idea, her antipathy toward offering US kids today the very same privilege that she and I both had - tuition free junior college (can't tax her fellow oligarchs to pay for that or any other social program donchaknow), etc. In short, the Right criticizes her for being a Socialist. I criticize her for being nowhere near Left, let alone a Socialist. The GroupThink that has emerged among some here is that she lost to the deranged orangutan through no fault of her own. If anyone other than she is to blame for her loss, a reasonable candidate would be Bernie. He ran on a rather standard Democratic candidate's platform and was attacked vociferously for doing so. He offered a glimpse of what Democratic Party principles used to be before her husband sold the soul of the Democratic Party to Wall Street donors. bcnu, Mikem It's mourning in America again.
Post #439,811 by crazy 9/8/21 4:46:44 PM 9/8/21 4:46:44 PM Reply	That was great. An absolutely coherent post from you. It was beautiful. Thank you. Hey CRC, as much as he may annoy us he's got some points here. This is not default predjuice or hate. This is well thought out points.
Post #439,815 by drook 9/9/21 9:28:15 AM 9/9/21 9:28:15 AM Reply	Except for one "... through no fault of her own." No one here has ever said that. There were many reasons, including her policies. What we've said repeatedly is that she would have won even with her less-than-ideal policies had it not been for the dirty tricks and stupid media horse-race-and-scandal coverage. Right now you want to point out that those policies were for worse than that, but if you do that only proves my point. Her policies were one of many problems. And frankly, she could have had the better policies that you prefer and I don't know that it would have changed much. -- Drew
Post #439,736 by mmoffitt 8/30/21 1:25:06 PM 8/30/21 1:25:07 PM Reply	Finally, even the Senator from MBNA beat him FFS. bcnu, Mikem It's mourning in America again.

Welcome to IWETHEY!