Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There's a difference between having a personal email and running a server.
Rice said she didn't use her personal email for any government correspondence.
Powell said he didn't save anything from his personal email and that account got closed years ago.
Hillary is the first one to have her own private server.
Minor details that don't fit the narrative. Her boat is slowly sinking, those of her supporters who aren't totally engrossed with bailing her out are still trying to plug holes in her bottom.
Will they be able to bail fast enough? Who knows, it depends how much Obama gets involved I think...
Minor details that don't fit the narrative. Her boat is slowly sinking, those of her supporters who aren't totally engrossed with bailing her out are still trying to plug holes in her bottom.
Will they be able to bail fast enough? Who knows, it depends how much Obama gets involved I think...
Having a personal email vs running a private server is MAJOR.
I would never be able to vote for her. I worked in the real estate company in NY that she used when house hunting.. she was the most vile, rude, disrespectful, conceited person EVER... Bill and Chelsea, on the other hand were very personable and treated people with respect. It was then I realized all that is said about her behavior in the white house was no joke.. she was that bad.
She's the biggest phony the democrats have staged in a long time. Who else would go as far as putting on a fake southern accent when speaking in southern states? She's never created a job in her life except for maybe the maids that take care of her Hampton house. She's obnoxious, a pathological liar and will say or do anything just so she can get her name and face in history books as the first woman president. How much more do you need? There's plenty more.
I gave up on the "lesser of two evils" argument decades ago, about the time Jimmy Carter started the Democratic Party on its march to the right. The American political system as currently structured is inherently corrupt. From campaign financing, to the fallacy of real choice at the ballot box. The Republicans and Democrats hold a duopoly of political power in The United States--with one party being sixty degrees to the right of center, and the other party being forty-five degrees to the right of center. The legitimate distinctions between the two overtly-capitalist political parties is minimal at best. Both serve the same masters, and it isn't the middle or working classes.
My preference would have been for Sanders to run as an independent--I still hope he changes his mind and does so after the Democrats shaft him. It's the classic case of lying down with dogs and getting up with fleas. We've already seen the way The DNC has attempted to sabotage Sanders at almost every juncture. We've seen the Clinton machine send its sycophantic endorsers after Sanders. We've seen the pro-Clinton mainstream media play its role in maintaining the status quo.
To see just where Hillary Clinton falls among the other candidates, here is a link to The Political Compass chart for 2016 Presidential Primary candidates:
For those unfamiliar with The Political Compass, it measures candidates on both a left/right political axis, and on an authoritarian/libertarian axis in regards to personal liberty. As you can see on the chart, Clinton is virtually identical to the Republican candidates on the left/right axis, and she is only slightly less authoritarian in her outlook. Sanders is a little bit to the left of center, and he straddles the line between authoritarian and libertarian. Hillary Clinton joins all of the Republican candidates in the upper-right quadrant--the quadrant representing candidates furthest to the right and most authoritarian.
Once again, Sanders is not a socialist. He is a progressive capitalist who I think sincerely wants to reform America's economic system. Since I don't believe capitalism can be reformed, I hardly consider Sanders to be a "perfect candidate", but he is a legitimate move in the right direction. As for electability, virtually all polling shows that it is Sanders who beats any of the Republicans candidates in a general election, while Clinton is in a virtual tie with Trump and would easily lose to Cruz or Rubio.
I would never describe myself as being a "progressive". I'm a socialist who does believe that progressivism can serve as an incremental means of getting beyond the particularly psychopathic form of capitalism represented by the Republican candidates and by Hillary Clinton. You can go on defining people who disagree with your willingness to settle for a candidate who bears little distinction from the other neocons as being "not that bright" or as being "Republican trolls", but many of us simply aren't inclined to drink the Hillary kool aid being sold by The Democratic Party machine.
Great article and graph.
Really does show that Hillary is more similar to the Republican candidates than she is to Bernie Sanders ...
I would never be able to vote for her. I worked in the real estate company in NY that she used when house hunting.. she was the most vile, rude, disrespectful, conceited person EVER... Bill and Chelsea, on the other hand were very personable and treated people with respect. It was then I realized all that is said about her behavior in the white house was no joke.. she was that bad.
Somehow, I don't find this to be surprising in the least
Behavior that seems like an extreme sociopath to me.
Of course, most politicians are like this, but still...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.